WTC 911 EyeWitness~Hoboken

[Stundie]

Not be any means, not even in the same league.

But a toy factory and an overpass are in the same league as the WTC....lol

Its hilarious that you do not see the double standards and pure hypocrisy of your own posts.

Now, you know why I said, "not in the same league."

Most buildings are constructed differently using different materials and structure layouts but the fact still remains.

Thermite can cut steel = FACT - As seen in Jon Coles video.

Thermite can bring down high rise steel structures = FACT - As seen in popular mechanics in 1935.

Crying about it and pointing out the differences doesn't change these facts.

[Stundie]

Nope! Just the ingredients.

But wait a minute you actually said....

"I don't see how there could not have been thermite found.

Aluminum aircraft came in contact with steel buildings under high temperatures, so there will be thermite found within the wreckage."

So now you are contradicting yourself.

• Last year You said that you do not see how there could not have been thermite, so there will be thermite found.
  
• This year No thermite, just the ingredients!!
  

You have now exposed yourself as either a moron who can't make up his mind about what is at the WTC and clearly doesn't know what he is talking about or you are just a barefaced liar. Which is it??

It is obvious that a sensible conversation can't be held with you because you are evidently delusional. I honestly believe that I have not seen a more obvious case of doublethink in my life. I shouldn't laugh but I'm not sure I can help you out.

You can have the ingredients of a cake on the table, but until the ingredients are properly mixed together and baked, they are just ingredients, not a cake.

And wait a minute, I'm sure I've hear something like that before....lol

You can create thermite in the lab using aluminum and rust oxide and igniting them under high temps.

I didn't know the WTC was a lab??

In other words, I can make cake with butter, flour, eggs and sugar whisked and put it in an oven, but I wouldn't expect a cake to magically appear if I just chucked the ingredients directly into the oven.

http://www.unexplain...45#entry4059584

So now you have resorted to stealing my quotes, rearranging them and then trying to use them against me....

Your debunking as totally gone to turd!! lol Its not debunking any more, it's you having a mental breakdown but you are unaware of it..lol

That's right! No molten steel, but lots and lots of molten aluminum.

There is no evidence of molten aluminium, not single eyewitness to the molten metal refer to it as aluminium, so therefore I am arguing with someone who operates on faith. Someone who claims he is an expert but showing absolutely no signs of his expertise, from someone who claims he knows better than all of those at GZ while sat behind a keyboard and wasn't there.

I think I've now gone past caring about what you think cause clearly, you've gone bonkers.

Edited April 4, 2013 by Stundie

[Stundie]

What more can I say?!

Not as confused as you sonshine...lol

• Last year You said that you do not see how there could not have been thermite, so there will be thermite found.
  
• This year No thermite, just the ingredients!!
  

I wonder what you will be saying next year with your flippy floppy contradictions and overall general cluelessness....lol

[Stundie]

....in other words, the same tired old 9-11 conspiracy crap re-packaged.

Which is no different to the same tired old 9-11 official story crap that gets repackaged.

Apparently last year, the official story teller on here told us all that he could not see how there could not be thermite, so it would have been found in the wreckage at GZ. Which has now been repackaged as, there is no thermite, just the ingredients.

It's not anything new with the official story either, repackaging is a way of life for the official story.

I remember way back, when the pancake collapse was the official story as to why the WTC collapsed as endorsed by FEMA. Then it was repackaged by the NIST who didn't support a pancake collapse but a truss failure theory.

It also reminds of the WTC7 which according to the official story collapsed due to the diesel tanks full of fuel, which was repackaged again by the NIST when they said that the tanks played no part in the collapse and that it was a single column failure that caused the collapse.

Haven´t we had enough of this nonsense already?

It makes me laugh when people post on a thread to complain about it as nonsense...lol

No one put a gun to your head and told you to read this thread or any other 9/11 woo thread you care to mention.

There is plenty of things on this forum that I think are nonsense but here is a little tip for you, I don't click on the stuff I think is nonsense. Its called ignoring the nonsense, that way it allow those who think that it is not nonsense, to type away until there nonsensical hearts are happy. Plus it supports free speech too by allowing those who have different opinions to me a forum to type there nonsense.

I have had enough of the nonsense in the official story, but it's my love of the truth (or should that be twoof!) that keeps me going.

Cheers

Stundie

Edited April 4, 2013 by Stundie

[Stundie]

It is all a simple logic and all it takes is a simple syringe. Simple push would prove you are incorrect.

But you and simple are synonymous, however you and logic....well that's a different kettle of fish.

So lets use your simple syringe example.

What happens when the syringe is being pushed down?

Does the air continue to escape outwards from the hole as the syringe continues to be pushed down.

or

Does the air puff out and then stop and find another escape route, then puff air out and stop, then find another escape route and puff out and stop and repeat until the syringe plunger is down.

Because like a syringe, in the case of the WTC, if those squibs were compressed air, they would continue to expel air, office debris and anything else out as the collapse continues downwards past the place where the air as escaped.

But we do not see this in the case of the WTC.

What we see is that a squib appears and blows out some air, office debris and then stop! Then another squib appears on a different floor and blows out some air, office debris and then stops! Then another squib appears like 40 floors below the collapse zone and blows out some air, office debris and then stops! Then another squib appears blows out some air, office debris and then stops! And this continues on all the way as the building collapses.

So it doesn't behave anything like your simple syringe because the squibs appear and disappear, so whatever was causing the squib was not continuous.

What is the mystery? I am very sure each building had air ducts and elevator shafts, which once again, brings us back to the syringe.

The mystery is you but that is another topic for another thread in the unexplained mysteries forum. lol

The air travels up and down all the air ducts and elevator shafts, closed doors for it to explode out the side of the building and then stop, do a u-turn, travel up and down all the air ducts and elevator shafts, closed doors again for it to explode out the side of the building in different location, for it do a u-turn, travel up and down all the air ducts and elevator shafts, closed doors again for it too appear in a different location.

Sorry unless this is magic air, then it's not air.

Of course it was air pressure. No one heard explosions as the building collapsed. Observe in the video, you sound of explosions.

We all know that lots of people heard explosions as the building collapsed, making that statement a total lie Skyeagle. But then you are delusional and no matter how many times I post people saying they heard booms/explosions, you will say that you know better because as an internet warrior on a panto debunking misssion, this is your remit.

We also know that the video camera microphone is hardly the best equipment to pick up explosions above all the yelling and building collapsing happening much closer. Making this point another one in your moot bin, which is overflowing with moots. lol

Have you forgotten that each level of a building is separated by floors? Simple logic, you understand.

Of course there each level is separated by floors??

Are you suggesting that the air took the elevators to travel up and down the building?? ...lol

How about both. I guess you forgot how 911 Truthers were duped by that hoaxed video of WTC7.

Glad you agree with both. You are definitely not as smart as you think you are and the evidence definitely doesn't support your case.

That you are not paying attention, given the fact that those on the lower floors spoke of a rush of air in the basement. Check it out.

I'm sure these guys felt wind and air from the building as it collapsed but it doesn't support the squibs argument because the squibs do not continue to expel air as it collapses, just like a simple syringe would do....lol

Simply science, you understand.

Yes, simple....but there is nothing science about it at all because it fails to meet your simple syringe test.

[skyeagle409]

But a toy factory and an overpass are in the same league as the WTC....lol

Its hilarious that you do not see the double standards and pure hypocrisy of your own posts.

Most buildings are constructed differently using different materials and structure layouts but the fact still remains.

Fire protection remained intact and none were struck by B-767s. BIG difference. The WTC buildings had there fire protection knocked off which exposed its steel structure to fire. In addition, inspections prior to 911 attacks found that the fire protection of the WTC buiilding was substandard and improperly installed. Photos show rust and exposed structures of the building and substandard fire protection installation.

Thermite can cut steel = FACT - As seen in Jon Coles video.

Thermite could not have brought down the WTC buildings and there was no evidence of thermite at ground zero. Ever thought why RDX, which is much more effective than thermite and used by the demolition industry, requires the use of explosives and structure pre-weakening?

Thermite can bring down high rise steel structures = FACT - As seen in popular mechanics in 1935.

Reality time. Demolition companies do not use thermite for demolishing buildings. A single person with a powered saw can knock down a steel tower. Nothing new there.

Edited April 4, 2013 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

But wait a minute you actually said....

The ingredients of thermite.

Last year You said that you do not see how there could not have been thermite, so there will be thermite found.

Nope, just the ingredients of thermite. In other words, no planted thermite was found. As I have said before, until you mix the ingredients of a cake mix, that is all you've got, just the ingredients, not the cake.

[skyeagle409]

Not as confused as you sonshine..

• Last year You said that you do not see how there could not have been thermite, so there will be thermite found.
  
• This year No thermite, just the ingredients!
  
• 
  

Just the ingredients, not the thermite.

1. Aluminum from the aircraft structure and aluminum from the facade of the WTC builidings.

2. Rust from the structure of the WTC buildings.

Verdict!! No thermite! Just the ingredients. No real mystery there.

[skyeagle409]

Which is no different to the same tired old 9-11 official story crap that gets repackaged.

The official story can't be crap by any means. After all, 911 Truthers have failed to produce a single shred of evidence that refutes the official story.

Apparently last year, the official story teller on here told us all that he could not see how there could not be thermite, so it would have been found in the wreckage at GZ.

Which there wasn't, just the ingredients of thermite, which came from the airframe of the B-767s and from the facade of the WTC builidngs and rust from the WTC buildings.

Which has now been repackaged as, there is no thermite, just the ingredients.

That's right!! Just the ingredients. As mentioned before, until you properly mix and bake the ingredients of a cake, you have no cake.

[skyeagle409]

So lets use your simple syringe example. What happens when the syringe is being pushed down?

Compressed air is forced out, which was exactly the case when the WTC buildings collapsed, and this video backups it up. Simply scientific logic, you understand. Something that even a high school science student would have understood. Check it out.

ENERGY TRANSFER IN THE WTC COLLAPSE

Thus, based on the dimensions of each WTC tower, there were 10,000 m3 of “open space” per floor. The collapsing floor acted like a giant piston compressing the air occupying the open space between floor and ceiling.

The pressure build-up would have shattered windows almost immediately, expelling the enclosed air. However, the process of collapse would have simultaneously crushed the gypsum wallboard and fiberglass insulation present on every floor and some of this debris would have been expelled also.

How fast was this dust cloud expelled? The first collapsing floor fell the 3.7-meter ceiling-to-floor distance in 0.87 seconds and subsequent floors fell much faster. It follows that a volume of dusty air near the center of a collapsing floor traversed a horizontal distance of about 16 meters in 0.87 seconds in exiting the building. This volume therefore had an average expulsion velocity of 66 km or 41 miles per hour. As we have shown, the twin towers ultimately attained a collapse velocity in excess of 50 m/s in which case thelower floors were crushed in 0.074 seconds and dust expulsion velocities approached 778 km or 484 miles per hour!

http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

Very simple to understand, which was something I knew back in high school. And remember, this video debunks claims that the WTC squibs was evidence of explosives.

Edited April 4, 2013 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

....in other words, the same tired old 9-11 conspiracy crap re-packaged. Haven´t we had enough of this nonsense already?

I agree! It is nonsense but the 911 Truthers just don't get it.

Edited April 4, 2013 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

It also reminds of the WTC7 which according to the official story collapsed due to the diesel tanks full of fuel, which was repackaged again by the NIST when they said that the tanks played no part in the collapse and that it was a single column failure that caused the collapse.

The evidence proved beyond any doubt that fire caused the collapse of WTC7.

It makes me laugh when people post on a thread to complain about it as nonsense..

Nonsense is issuing a claim the WTC buildings were brought down by thermite when no such evidence exist, and then, turn around and claim that explosives were used without a shred of evidence. That is nonsense!!

The real evidence supports the official story, not fabricated fantasies of 911 Truthers. How many 911 Truthers fell for this video and claimed it was evidence that explosives were used to bring down WTC7?

Edited April 4, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Babe Ruth]

Holy Smokes! Did anybody see the pictures on last night's TV news about the tall building (unoccupied and still under construction) that caught fire somewhere in Russia?

Huge flames, going on for hours, and somehow the building did not collapse. Funny thing was all the falling debris fell straight down vertical. None was ejected laterally like at WTC.

Wonder why? I guess the laws of physics were on holiday at WTC, eh?

[skyeagle409]

Holy Smokes! Did anybody see the pictures on last night's TV news about the tall building (unoccupied and still under construction) that caught fire somewhere in Russia?

Yep!

Huge flames, going on for hours, and somehow the building did not collapse.

Was that building struck by a B-767? Nope? Now, it you want to see the collapse of structural steel during a fire, check out this photo and noticed the crumbled remains of structural steel to where only the concrete core remained standing.

[Babe Ruth]

No Sky, it wasn't. And neither was WTC 7

Sometimes you make it so easy.

[Sweetpumper]

Sky, if this is ever resolved, what are you moving on to next?

Edited April 4, 2013 by Sweetpumper

[skyeagle409]

No Sky, it wasn't. And neither was WTC 7

Sometimes you make it so easy.

On the contrary, WTC7 suffered from massive impact damage. Did that building in Russia suffer from such massive impact damage as WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7? No!

* Fires within WTC 7

* Massive impact damage to WTC 7

* Buckling of WTC 7 before its collapse

In addition:

The Kader Toy Factory Fire

The burning question of safety

This week marked the 13th anniversary of the disastrous Kader toy factory fire in Buddha Monthon district of Nakhon Pathom, in which 188 workers died and 469 were injured. Many who died on May 10, 1993 were young women from impoverished rural families. A large number of the injured suffered serious and permanent disabilities after they were forced to jump from second, third and fourth floors of the buildings to avoid being burned alive. Hundreds of workers were packed into each of the three structures that collapsed.

There were no fire extinguishers, no alarms, no sprinkler systems and the elevated walkways between the buildings were either locked or used as storage areas. The buildings themselves were firetraps, constructed from steel girders that buckled and gave way in less than 15 minutes.

http://www.thaivisa....y-factory-fire/

Three steel framed buildings collapsing due to fire in 15 minutes.

Notice that a huge bomb was unable to bring down WTC1 in 1993. You will also notice that the steel columns were hardly affected by the huge bomb blast even though they are sitting in the crater of the blast.

There were a lot of firsts for the WTC. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been hit with a plane traveling 500 miles an hour and had its fire proofing removed from its trusses. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever had its steel columns which hold lateral load sheared off by a 767. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been a building which had its vertical load bearing columns in its core removed by an airliner. For Building 7, in all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been left for 6-7 hours with its bottom floors on fire with structural damage from another building collapse.

Not the Madrid/Windsor tower did not have almost 40 stories of load on its supports after being hit by another building which left a 20 story gash. The Madrid tower lost portions of its steel frame from the fire. Windsor's central core was steel reinforced concrete. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been without some fire fighters fighting the fires.

http://www.debunking...m/firsttime.htm

After 9:59 am: WTC Building 7 appears damaged

WTC Building 7 appears to have suffered significant damage at some point after the WTC towers had collapsed, according to firefighters at the scene. Firefighter Butch Brandies tells other firefighters that nobody is to go into Building 7 because of creaking and noises coming out of there.

According to Deputy Chief Peter Hayden, there is a bulge in the southwest corner of the building between floors 10 and 13. Battalion Chief John Norman later recalls,

"At the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged." Deputy Chief Nick Visconti also later recalls recounts, "A big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side."

Captain Chris Boyle recalls,

"On the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors."

http://www.oilempire.us/wtc7.html

Edited April 4, 2013 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

Sky, if this is ever resolved, what are you moving on to next?

That is there is no evidence of a government conspiracy and the fact that terrorist plans to fly airliners into the WTC buildings, the Capitol building, the White House, CIA headquarters, the Pentagon, and other U.S. landmarks was first revealed in the 1990s by the Philippine government.

Just prior to the 911 attacks, countries around the world, including muslim countries, revealed terrorist plans to attack the United States. It has also been revealed that terrorist had plans to fly an airliner into the Eiffel Tower in Paris, which was broken up by French forces before the airliner could leave the ground. In other words, nothing there to even remotely suggest a government conspiracy.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confirmed his role in planning the 911 attacks and I might add that it was his nephew, Ramzi Yousef, was the person who detonated a huge bomb beneath WTC1 in 1993. He later admitted that he tried to topple one of the WTC buildings onto the other.

Edited April 4, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Sweetpumper]

That is there is no evidence of a government conspiracy and the fact that terrorist plans to fly airliners into the WTC buildings, the Capitol building, the White House, CIA headquarters, the Pentagon, and other U.S. landmarks was first revealed in the 1990s by the Philippine government.

Just prior to the 911 attacks, countries around the world, including muslim countries, revealed terrorist plans to attack the United States. It has also been revealed that terrorist had plans to fly an airliner into the Eiffel Tower in Paris, which was broken up by French forces before the airliner could leave the ground. In other words, nothing there to even remotely suggest a government conspiracy.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confirmed his role in planning the 911 attacks and I might add that it was his nephew, Ramzi Yousef, was the person who detonated a huge bomb beneath WTC1 in 1993. He later admitted that he tried to topple one of the WTC buildings onto the other.

I meant what topic. You went from UFOs to 911. If this died, what topic would you move on to?

[Stundie]

The ingredients of thermite.

Even when I show you the quote you posted last year, you still lie about it. hahahahahaha!! Its there in black and white on the screen.

You didn't just say that there was the ingredients of thermite, you said thermite would be found. You said you do not know how it could not be found. hahahahaha!!!

Now a year later, you are twisting it too saying, oh it's was just the ingredients. Pathetic!!

Nope, just the ingredients of thermite. In other words, no planted thermite was found. As I have said before, until you mix the ingredients of a cake mix, that is all you've got, just the ingredients, not the cake.

So you was wrong a year ago then?? lol

After I pointed out to you that just because you have the ingredients, doesn't mean you get thermite. hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!

Truly stunningly pathetic!! You didn't say it before, you said it after I pointed out to you the problem with your logic.

And here we are, over a year later, after living with the shame of being wrong of saying that thermite would be found, you have now flip flopped and said that no thermite was found.

How can anyone argue with such retarded logic that is about as consistent as verbal diarrhea....lol

[skyeagle409]

I meant what topic. You went from UFOs to 911. If this died, what topic would you move on to?

Actually, I like it here. I don't see myself going anywhere else at this time.

[Stundie]

The official story can't be crap by any means. After all, 911 Truthers have failed to produce a single shred of evidence that refutes the official story.

There is plenty of evidence which refutes it.

Putting your fingers in your ears and going la-la-la-la-la-la! Doesn't make it go away. lol

Which there wasn't, just the ingredients of thermite, which came from the airframe of the B-767s and from the facade of the WTC builidngs and rust from the WTC buildings.'

But last year, you said it was there....lol

And that it occurred naturally, until I pointed out how absurd that theory is, along with just about every other one you have proposed...lol

That's right!! Just the ingredients. As mentioned before, until you properly mix and bake the ingredients of a cake, you have no cake.

But that is not what you were saying last year was it...lol

You said thermite would be found....lol

Flipity flopperty!!

Edited April 4, 2013 by Stundie

[skyeagle409]

Even when I show you the quote you posted last year, you still lie about it. hahahahahaha!! Its there in black and white on the screen.

On the contrary, there was no planted thermite recovered from ground zero, only the ingredients. To back that up, there was no evidence of any kind of thermite cutting on the steel columns. And, to back it up even further, thermite is not an explosive nor capable of bringing down the WTC buildings.

You said thermite would be found...

Only the ingredients of thermite. Simple as that.

Edited April 4, 2013 by skyeagle409

[Stundie]

Actually, I like it here. I don't see myself going anywhere else at this time.

Yeah, he likes the shame and clearly has masochistic tendencies....lol

[skyeagle409]

Yeah, he likes the shame and clearly has masochistic tendencies....lol

On the contrary, name one government official implicated in the 911 attacks, I will continue to remind you if you fail to post a name.