3292 replies to this topic

[skyeagle409]

Notable Retractions

New Mexico demolitions expert Van Romero said on the day of the attack that he believed the building collapses were "too methodical" to have been a result of the collisions, and that he thought "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse."

His remarks were published in the Albuquerque Journal  Ten days later the same newspaper printed a retraction, in which Romero is quoted as saying "Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail."

[Insaniac]

skyeagle409, on 03 November 2012 - 08:51 AM, said:

Grenades cannot demolish steel frame buildings.

No duh. Neither can fire, like you stated in a recent post.  

Quote

The Bush administration did not take the warnings from around the world serious enough, but our intelligence services can also take the blame because they dropped the ball, as admitted by the CIA and the FBI, and revealed by post 9/11 investigations.

Ignoring such warnings is nothing new in government and in fact, J. Edgar Hoover ignored warnings from a double agent on the Japanese and the rest became history when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.

Another case was where President Jimmy Carter ignored warnings on what would happen if the Shah of Iran was admitted to the United States for medical reasons, and when he did, Iranian militants overran our embassy in Iran and it has been downhill since then.

President Clinton dropped the ball on Osama bin Laden, and he has admitted that was a downside of his presidency.  And of course, there was the bombing in Lebanon that killed over 200 Americans and warnings were also  ignored prior to the bombing of the USS Cole.

There is nothing there to support a 9/11 government conspiracy, just a bad case of ignorance on the part of our elected officials, and our intelligence and military services.

True, but although I hate having to admit it, there is a conspiracy at work. So many videos on Youtube point in that direction regarding the Illuminati, Government, NWO, Bilderbergs, etc.

Peace

[skyeagle409]

Insaniac, on 03 November 2012 - 09:47 AM, said:

No duh. Neither can fire, like you stated in a recent post.

Fire can generate enough heat to collapse buildings. Fire collapsed three steel frame buildings in Thailand.



And collapsed the steel structure of the Windsor buildings fire in Spain where only the concrete core was left standing.



What you see above is the concrete reinforced core. What's missing is the steel around the core of the upper floors which was not covered in concrete. As with the towers, it weakened and collapsed early in the fire.

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 November 2012 - 05:19 AM.

[Kludge808]

Okay, I find this interesting.  BR disappears for a while and Crumar shows up.  BR's back (damn it!) and Crumar seem to be gone.

Anyway, thanks for covering for me, guys.  Real life did a number on me again so I wasn't able to reply to Crumar's post as quickly as I would have liked.  I need to get to 1000 posts so I have all my basic stars and that's not gonna happen any time soon at this rate.  Of course, then I'll be working on my blue stars which take a bit longer to collect.

Something I wanted to point out to Crumar is a thing called "convergence of testimony."  For those in the audio radiance unfamiliar with the phrase, it means sifting through all of the witness statements to find where it converges on a single very narrow range which represents that from a majority of witnesses.  Anything that falls outside that range, like those who say the airplane flew North of the Citgo, is not counted in the final analysis.  As it is, something like 150 witnesses all agreed on the events according to what the evidence showed and the remaining 50 or so either didn't or gave statements that were confused or clearly fabricated.

With that, some of the truther "testimony" was taken years after the event and the memories of events shift over time.  Ask any prosecuting attorney who is depending on witness statements in court years after the fact being consistent with what they gave at the time of the particular events.  Further, it was cherry picked and edited so it would support the CTists agenda.   Also, pay close attention to what was actually said.  Did the cabbie state for fact that it was staged or was he asked if it could have been?  The reason I ask is that his cab was damaged by a falling lamp post which puts an interesting twist on things.  Was his original statement the same as given on the CT sites or did it change?

As to cell phone cameras etc, there is a delayed reaction time from first seeing an airplane like AAL77 at low altitude and realizing something is amiss to actually getting out the cell to make a video.  It takes precious seconds and by that time, the collision had happened and there wasn't a whole lot to make videos of except the aftermath.  Camcorders take even longer.

There's more but I'm tired and need to rest. (Edit: Put things in order - fatigue is a female dog in heat)

Edited by Kludge808, 04 November 2012 - 05:33 AM.

[skyeagle409]

Kludge808, on 04 November 2012 - 05:31 AM, said:

Okay, I find this interesting.  BR disappears for a while and Crumar shows up.  BR's back (damn it!) and Crumar seem to be gone.

I have noticed that as well.

[skyeagle409]

[Crumar]

Kludge808, on 04 November 2012 - 05:31 AM, said:

Okay, I find this interesting.  BR disappears for a while and Crumar shows up.  BR's back (damn it!) and Crumar seem to be gone.

As I said in another post until I educate myself more on this subject I will refrain from posting on this subject matter and look at all the evidence when time permits.  Also as well as I have been busy in real life when I have the time I will try to continue to have a discussion with you guys.

[Insaniac]

skyeagle409, on 04 November 2012 - 05:18 AM, said:

Fire can generate enough heat to collapse buildings. Fire collapsed three steel frame buildings in Thailand.

And collapsed the steel structure of the Windsor buildings fire in Spain where only the concrete core was left standing.

What you see above is the concrete reinforced core. What's missing is the steel around the core of the upper floors which was not covered in concrete. As with the towers, it weakened and collapsed early in the fire.

I guess you learn something new every day.

My response to this is I'd assume Thailand and Spain don't have the fortune of owning the same quality of steel that the US of A does.

I have a hard time believing that fire ate through the steel within the WTC, hence it's breakdown. Especially when several witnesses claim they heard bombs go off.

I don't take anything the Government states as truth. I know better than to ignorantly assume or blindly believe. Sorry.

[Babe Ruth]

Crumar

I guess you and I are in some sort of conspiracy, eh?

And it's well known in some circles that gubmint men do not conspire.

I would offer some words of caution to you--reason does not prevail on this topic, with some people.  Though he be butt nekid, some folks see the Emperor as being clothed, and indeed, admire his finery.  So, one cannot expect reason to prevail.

It is a very sensitive subject.

[skyeagle409]

Insaniac, on 04 November 2012 - 11:10 AM, said:

I guess you learn something new every day.

I live not far from where that overpass collapsed from fire. Besides, I use to soften aircraft-grade steel in an oven in order to fabricate complex aircraft parts.

Quote

My response to this is I'd assume Thailand and Spain don't have the fortune of owning the same quality of steel that the US of A does.

I have a hard time believing that fire ate through the steel within the WTC, hence it's breakdown. Especially when several witnesses claim they heard bombs go off

Steel is steel. You only have to look at the overpass gasoline fire near San Francisco, CA.

Quote

Overpass Near San Francisco Collapses After Fire

He was not the only one wondering how the overpass, which dates to the 1950’s, had failed. At a noontime press conference held at a toll plaza near the collapse, Mr. Kempton said the heat from the fireball had likely melted the steel girders and bolts that support the concrete roadway. “If you have that kind of heat, you’re going to have this kind of reaction,” he said. “We’re not surprised this happened.”

http://www.nytimes.c...lapse.html?_r=0

Just as fire weaken the steel structure of that overpass, the same occurred with the WTC buildings, and another point to ponder,  the overpass was not struck by a B-767 nor by debris from a tall building.

The witnesses did not hear bomb explosions. They only thought they heard bomb explosions, and remember, no bomb explosions were detected on seismic monitors nor was evidence of explosives found in the rubble of the WTC buildings.

I might add that simply placing a bomb inside a steel frame building is no guarantee the building is going to collapse because the blast wave simply flows around steel columns like wind around the wing of an airplane, and blows out walls and windows. After all, why does it take many months to prepare a building for demolition? Why does a steelstructure have to be pre-weaken?

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 November 2012 - 04:47 PM.

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 04 November 2012 - 02:25 PM, said:

Crumar

I guess you and I are in some sort of conspiracy, eh?

And it's well known in some circles that gubmint men do not conspire.

But, there is no evidence of a 9/11 government conspiracy. It was made up and 9/11 Truthers took the bait. That explains  why after more than 11 years, no evidence of a government conspiracy has surfaced.

[skyeagle409]

Crumar, on 04 November 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

As I said in another post until I educate myself more on this subject I will refrain from posting on this subject matter and look at all the evidence when time permits.

Then, why did you allow yourself to become a victim of those 9/11 conspiracy websites? I am sure you are aware those conspiracy websites took  a serious beating after facts and evidence were revealed concerning Cleveland airport and United 93.

In that particular case,  9/11 conspiracist confused a Delta Airlines, B-767 as United 93, which was a B-757, and scientist from a KC-135 as passengers from United 93. Check it out and understand why I have said that you are allowing yourself to become a victim of those conspiracy websites who prey on gullible people like yourself.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

United 93 and Cleveland Airport

http://www.911myths...._cleveland.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Insaniac]

skyeagle409, on 04 November 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

But, there is no evidence of a 9/11 government conspiracy. It was made up and 9/11 Truthers took the bait. That explains  why after more than 11 years, no evidence of a government conspiracy has surfaced.

Thats because your wicked Government barred investigations and disposed of all the incriminating evidence. Fire, as I suspected, cannot destroy steel structures without the help of Thermite. Fire alone can only weaken steel, but isn't intense enough to destroy it.

The eyewitness accounts still stand, as well.

One more thing, and I want everybody to read this part: If you truly believe that 9/11 wasn't an inside job, why don't you just move on with your life instead of wasting your time? Seems to me like you're intentionally attempting to cover up the truth.

[skyeagle409]

Insaniac, on 04 November 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

Thats because your wicked Government barred investigations and disposed of all the incriminating evidence.

The government cannot completely bar an investigation into  the 9/11 attacks. A huge amount of evidence has already been released and when the FDR from American 77 was reviewed, the review of the FDR data reconfirmed the official story, but it was clear from the level of damage inside and outside the Pentagon, that the evidence supported the official story.

Remember, the Boeing Aircraft Company, American Airlines, and United  Airlines, the  American Institute of Architects, American Society of Civil Engineers, Protec Services, nor other demolition companies, are not government agencies and yet, they support the government story as well.

And once again, no evidence of explosives were seen nor heard on the videos, nor evidence of explosives recovered from the rubble of the WTC buildings nor at the Fresh Kills landfill, not to mention no evidence of thermite cuts on the steel columns recovered from the rubble of the WTC buildings. It was evident from the buckling of the WTC buildings prior to their collapse, that fire was in the process of weakening the steel structures of the WTC buildings.

Quote

WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

Indications of the Imminent Collapse
of the World Trade Center Buildings
Disprove Explosives Theory

Scientists investigating the Sept. 11, 2001 collapse of the twin towers said, "the World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground." There would not be telltale signs if it was explosives (Controlled Demolition) that caused the buildings to collapse.

"In the case of the north tower, police chopper pilots reported seeing the warning signs - an inward bowing of the building facade - at least eight minutes before it collapsed at 10:29 a.m." New York Daily News reporter Paul Shin wrote in his June 19th, 2004 article 9/11 cops saw collapse coming.

"Federal engineering investigators studying the destruction of the World Trade Center's twin towers on Sept. 11 said New York Police Department aviation units reported an inward bowing of the buildings' columns in the minutes before they collapsed, a signal they were about to fall." - NYC Police Saw Sign of Tower Collapse, Study Says


Several minutes before the WTC buildings collapsed, the structures of the buildings were clearly failing and the exterior steel columns could be seen buckling. This simply would not be happening if explosives caused the collapse because explosives don't go off in slow motion for several minutes. Explosives don't slowly buckle steel columns over several minutes.

Just goes to show that explosives were never in the equation, but fire was.

Quote

Fire, as I suspected, cannot destroy steel structures without the help of Thermite.

On the contrary, the three steel buildings in Thailand were in fact, destroyed by fire alone. The fire of the Windsor building  completely destroyed its steel structure.

Quote

...Fire alone can only weaken steel, but isn't intense enough to destroy it.

Fire alone has been known to destroyed steel structures as revealed by the destruction of the three steel buildings in Thailand and the complete collapse of the steel structure of the Windsor building in Spain..

Quote

The eyewitness accounts still stand, as well.

From the same eyewitnesses who later confirmed that the sounds their heard were from elevators, not explosives.

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 November 2012 - 09:08 PM.

[Insaniac]

Fire alone cannot melt holes through, and destroy steel skyscrapers and it makes no sense. Sorry. Prove fire destroyed the WTC. Focus on the WTC.

No evidence was found because the US Government got rid of the incriminating evidence. The FBI were blocked from investigating shortly after the attack took place because the Gov didn't want them finding out the truth. Simple. Admittedly, I don't know much about 9/11 but I'm learning more as we speak. If it is indeed true that witnesses heard falling elevators and not bombs, then atleast we have the thermite evidence.

Thermite evidence was actually found within air samples anyhow. That isn't up for debate. It's simple fact. That proves fire alone didn't destroy the building. The following video isn't the best of proof, but bear with me, here. Theres a conspiracy at work, and you're blinded to it. 9/11 was an inside job.

Edited by Insaniac, 04 November 2012 - 09:57 PM.