< HOME  Tuesday, September 19, 2006

9/11 - Can you keep a secret? I hope not

"The NIST report represents what can really only be called anti-science. They started with their conclusion and worked their way back to some leading hypothesis."

* * *

"The steel in dragon-like lengths and contortions spoke for itself - bent, deformed - without cracks."

* * *

"I find it hard to believe that it actually bent because of the size of it and how there's no cracks in the iron. It bent without almost a single crack in it. It takes thousands of degrees to bend steel like this."

* * *

"Typically, you'd have buckling and tearing on the tension side, but there's no buckling at all."

* * *

"Here is the meteorite - molten iron fused with concrete."

* * *

"Architects, engineers, people who work with steel - welders - have just never seen the level of destruction and the level of deformation of this material in their lives."

* * *

"As I stood there on the 33rd floor, I heard very strange noises on the 34th floor. now, the 34th floor was an empty floor - a floor that did not have any kind of walls, it was a construction floor. It was totally hollowed out there was nothing there . . . not even the elevators stopped there. You had to have a special access key to open the door on the 34th floor"
The theory that explosives brought down World Trade Centers 1, 2 and 7 requires an opportunity for those explosives to be laid in strategic places throughout the buildings.

From many accounts, the 34th floor was not the only vacant floor in that tower. And similar vacancies riddled the other two buildings. It seems that if someone wanted to rig the buildings for demolition, they had ample opportunity to do it.

The only problem is, they would also need willing participants. They could get them, I suppose, by telling them that they were doing something other than what they did, or by paying them enough money to keep quiet all these years.

It seems hard to believe that anyone could keep this kind of secret for so long, with so many people dead and suffering around the world as a result of this colossal crime. But even this unlikely scenario is more likely than the possibility of those towers collapsing into their own footprints - completely pulverized - solely as a result of structural failures caused by fire.

In the video clip, an intact New York Times newspaper from 1969 was pulled out of the rubble of the towers. Construction workers had placed it, as memorabilia, in the hollow center of a steel beam when the towers were being built.

It was a well placed secret. I bet they never thought it would be seen again under these circumstances. But, no secret can be kept forever.

Eventually, the truth will come out. All it takes is one honest person.

21 Comments:

At Tuesday, September 19, 2006, Blogger ka05 said...

I love what you guys are doing. Keep it up.

I really need these 9/11 Daily Reminders. The world needs them.

And the money stuff is right on, too!

Peace!

 
At Tuesday, September 19, 2006, Blogger Tom said...

It wasn't "controlled demolition." The buildings were undergoing changes that could be seen. The exterior columns were bowing wright at the floors were the fires were MANY minutes before the buildings fell. THAT IS NOT HOW A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION HAPPENS. please see WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory


See this video: Facts the "9/11 Skeptics" don't want you t

here is the real cover-up: What motivated the 9/11 hijackers? See testimony most didn't

 
At Tuesday, September 19, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

Thanks, Ka05! You guys make it all worthwhile.

Tom, I'm not surprised that the top part of the towers collapsed. But, I am surprised that all three structures - two of them over one hundred stories, and one which was not even hit by a plane - collapsed into their own footprints with barely a trace of intact cement around. Too miraculous to be true.

On the other hand, I agree 100% that if "Al Qaeda" had the capability to fly those airplanes into those towers unassisted by some state military apparatus, then YES they certainly did it because of US support for Israel, among other outrageous Middle East policies. And the link to the video you provided is outstanding.

But, as far as 9/11 is concerned there are just too many unanswered questions surrounding the circumstances of the collapses to say that the case is closed.

 
At Tuesday, September 19, 2006, Blogger Tom said...

qrswave,

thank you for your comment about my video.

Think about the enormous weight of the towers and the tremendous amount of potential energy that was released the second the tops of the towers gave way. There is simply no way that the tops of the towers can travel downwards even for a short distance and then be stopped by the remainder of the building. There is no way a force of that degree can be resisted by the remainder of the building. And the buildings DID NOT collapse into their footprints. please see the video. If you look at the videos, you see it like a banana unpeeling with the building coming apart and falling away very far from the footprints. This is important to understand because debris from WTC1 hit WTC7. WTC 7 was severely damaged on the south side of the building and was on fire for about 7 hours

 
At Tuesday, September 19, 2006, Blogger yragntman said...

re WTC collapse
1 Meridan Plaza fire - burned 22 hours - no collapse
1 New York Plaza fire - burned 6 hours - no collapse
Caracas Tower fire - burned 17 hours - no collapse

 
At Tuesday, September 19, 2006, Blogger nesNYC said...

It wasn't "controlled demolition."

Almost correct. It was controlled, progressive destruction that took about an hour to complete on each tower. These were not conventional civilian CD's so the civilian CD experts don't understand the mechanism used to bring this about.

Basically, the heat did have a big part in bowing the outer support columns near the plane impacts because those areas were burned by the planted thermite charges as shown in some video footage. The same process was simultaneously occurring in the basements and when this process was done, the explosive devices that were placed near the central support columns were detonated from top to the bottom in rapid succession and is why the towers "banana peeled" from top to bottom and the ensuing pulverization resulted.

 
At Tuesday, September 19, 2006, Blogger Erosoplier said...

It was meant to look like a collapse. It "peeled like a banana," but it had a "hollow core." A "hollow core" consisting only of huge structural steel - steel stong enough to carry not only its own weight, but 2 or 3 times the weight of all the other concrete and metal that went into the building. What destroyed the core? The whole collapse scenario is based on the idea that the floor panels gave way, one upon the other. So there are no forces, lateral or vertical, left to account for the destruction of the core column.

I don't think it was (the) thermite that bowed the panels. In each case, there wasn't enough fuel left behind after the initial explosions to account for the size and impact of the ensuing fires. And in any case, kero fires can't do to steel what got done to the wtc steel.

What I'm saying is, they added extra smoke, and extra fire, to make the buildings look like they were being damaged enough to collapse.

That powder/dust in the video is wierd - as are all the heavy noises.

 
At Wednesday, September 20, 2006, Blogger AlreadyPublished said...

Tom - think about the temperature required to make metal --any metal -- glow bright yellow.
Think about the tons of brightly glowing molten metal that poured from the Sth Tower for at least 7 minutes immediately preceding its collapse.
Think about the temperature required to produce the Sth Tower metal fire that burned for approximately ten minutes at the northeast corner of the 81st floor.
(NISTNCSTAR1-5A_chapter_9_AppxC - p. 344.)
Think about the pools of molten steel under buildings 1,2 and 7 as reported to us by numerous recovery workers and presented in thermal migration maps.
Think about all the steel construction below the impact zone that for some reason failed to provide any resistance whatsoever to the fall of the portion above.
Think about the result of an 800C towering inferno.

Think about 5 explosives-tainted Mossad agents celebrating in Liberty State Park.

 
At Wednesday, September 20, 2006, Blogger Doogie Talons said...

The one honest person won't hold up.

The people who actually rigged the building to explode could have been killed afterwards and are now recognised as victims of 11/9

The people who actually arranged the riggers and thier subsequent killings simply are not honest people and have already covered thier tracks.

 
At Wednesday, September 20, 2006, Blogger Netsurfer2012 said...

i agree.

Operation Northwoods, revision 2. The first rule of assassination, kill the killer(s).

Without WTC 7, people would not have enough clues to suspect. No plane, yet it still collapses into its footprint.

If kerosene could be used to collapse skyscrapers after 7 hours of burning, why isn't that technique used instead? It's much more economical?

 
At Wednesday, September 20, 2006, Blogger Akber said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At Wednesday, September 20, 2006, Blogger brookskof said...

"There is no way a force of that degree can be resisted by the remainder of the building. "

Force of what degree? Can you show your calcuations?

There's a reason something similar looking to 9/11 has only happened in CDs. It's because damaged buildings topple over. Not fall straight into a pile of rubble. When part of a structure is structural disected from the rest of the structure it slides. Not demolishes everything under it.

 
At Wednesday, September 20, 2006, Blogger Akber said...

My initial thoughts on 9/11/2001 were that the south tower collapsed first because the plane hit lower, leaving a larger load at the top to push down on the core. Stay with me a moment -

When a 'controlled demolition' occurs, it saps the weight-bearing parts so that the top of the building falls down into the bottom. So, yes, it was a 'controlled demolition', with the core failure at the impact point allowing the building to collapse in on itself.

So, the only point of contention is: was an explosive used to break the core, or did it fail due to impact/heat/load above. By looking at the pictures, we see the core failing and the collapse initiating at the point of plane impacts. To plant explosives at the exact right points and then control the planes to hit that point - requires co-ordination and good luck whose probability is very small.

WTC 7 story may come out after Silverstein has got his money. Until the government or NIST finds the cause, we assume it to be a 'pull-down'.

Free-fall time:
The free-fall time is actually the top portion crushing through the bottom like a knife through butter - nothing could stand in the way. The top portion, with its entire weight, just creamed its way to the bottom, due to something called momentum.

The real culprit
I have experienced skyscraper sway, being extra-sensitive to it. Sway is handled by visco-elastic dampers. Without them, these buildings would have to be 10 times strongers so that they can stand up to the wind. The WTC towers had thousands of such dampers between the beams and the concrete. In other words, everything was glued together using 3M material and these products from the late 60s were not exactly state-of-the-art - and the WTC was the first use of them due to its sheer walls and wind loads.

The visco-elastic dampers melted under the heat, producing live loads. No one wants to mention them because a lot of skyscrapers would have to be torn down were that the case. Look it up :)
How visco-elastic dampers failed

Now, if this gets out there - it will be big - we would have to rethink how skyscrapers are built - or not built at all :)

 
At Wednesday, September 20, 2006, Blogger Netsurfer2012 said...

>The culprit: The visco-elastic dampers

that explains parts of the 2 tower collapses. less explosives needed.

>with the core failure at the impact
>point providing the detonation for the
>building to collapse in on itself.

there's video footage showing the pre-collapse explosions at the base of the towers, even ground vibrations picked up by distant richter scales which recorded the below ground noise spike with the subsequent rumbling from the 10-second collapses.

howver, the PTB will likely acquire all those videos and play them out of sequence, much like the Zapruder film, to "debunk" and deny what people are realizing.

 
At Thursday, September 21, 2006, Blogger quasimodo said...

No RDX or thermate could turn those massive columns into horseshoes, with nice smooth edges. This was a NUKULAR EVENT, likely managed with scaled down hydrogen bombs.

 
At Thursday, September 21, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

a great post lets all crack 9/11 for good.

 
At Thursday, September 21, 2006, Blogger AlreadyPublished said...

The top portion, with its entire weight, just creamed its way to the bottom, due to something called momentum.


Instead of pretending that one portion of a building can plummet through lower portions without any sign of phsyical (see physics) resistance, please review the information linked in my previous post, akber, including that relating to the pre-collapse presence and post-collapse persistance of molten metal.

Because the answer is glowing in the wind.

 
At Saturday, September 23, 2006, Blogger jinni said...

The concrete could not have been what destroyed the lower floors it was busy forming massive clouds of dust , how could it be at two places at once ?
Iv been reading this PANC scary s**t . You Americans want to rule the world .
The only difference between America and Nazi Germany is America makes better movies .

 
At Tuesday, December 19, 2006, Blogger steven andresen said...

I am interested in having someone respond to the material in these posts on CounterPunch:

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn11282006.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/darkfire11282006.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/physic11282006.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/thermo11282006.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/jw11282006.html

I am dazzled by the science, mostly, and am unable to evaluate who is correct about questions like, how hot did it get, how hot did it need to get to do what it did, was there evidence of explosives, and so forth. I think many people resist any discussion of the Towers because they do not understand the scientific evidence and what exactly was discovered.

 
At Tuesday, April 21, 2009, Blogger lijialefw said...

cheap wow power leveling cheapest wow power leveling buy wow power leveling CHEAP power leveling CHEAPEST wow gold BUY wow powerleveling

 
At Wednesday, August 03, 2016, Blogger Seo Oj said...

permission.
boneka sex
boneka sex jepang
boneka sex
obat kuat sex
perangsang wanita
boneka full body
boneka full body
boneka sex
boneka sex
boneka full body
jual alat bantu sex wanita

 

Post a Comment

<< Home