The Truth about 911 gutting the disinformation, LETS GET IT ON

[Esperanto]

Did you listen to the audio clip? Larry said he blew it up. Or you don't think that's Larry Silverstein?

 

[Burnsys]

Larry Silverstein, the controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish the Solomon Bros. building, or WTC 7, late in the afternoon of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001.

In the documentary "America Rebuilds", aired September 2002, Silverstein makes the following statement;

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse." http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/PULLIT.mp3

In the same program a cleanup worker referred to the demolition of WTC 6: "... we're getting ready to pull the building six." http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pull-it2.mp3


America Rebuilds: http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/

 

[Sub-Zer0]

Perhaps I'm biased but they don't even seem to be able to respond to our arguements unless they are twisting our words or creating strawmen. I'm baffled that they could even believe half of this. I'd be more than willing to continue this if only in the hopes that we might be able to get them to be more incredulous of their sources or this wacky version of physics they are learning.

I'm not sure you guys really know what you're talking about as much as you think you do, I've talked about Steel weakening at 2000 degrees and offered several scholarly links to supporate this claim, and all you've said is, "I AM WRONG" but cannot pull up an enginnering link to substanciate your claim, are you expecting me to just take your word for it? Cause that's not happening, show my a link, then you have a point.

THe only other thing I can discuss that seems like it could be interpeted as physics oriented is, for the buildings to fall at virtual freefall speed the enitre column would have to be destroyed, that's how buildings are demolished, explosive are placed all long one of the column, it controlled demolition it's the one in the middle, this achives the symetrical collapse, making the building fall in on itself, that's what I said. That's more common sense than anything.


Where's the wacky physics?

I want to see links

 

[Sub-Zer0]

Your information is not accurate. No one said they blew it up, if they had, there wouldn't be any question, would there?

If you have nothing factual to present, I suggest you stop wasting our time here.

Of course there is becuse the military industrial complex who owns are government and who also owns the media doesen't want the truth about 9/11 to come out so they spin it to mean differen't things, "Pull" the building has alwasy meant controlled demoliton, and this is simply the elite trying to save Silverestine's ass by changing the symantics of what he meant after he slipped up, show many any sky scraper that has EVER falled from fire, or falled from ANYTHING but controlled demolition, or earthquakes, I don't care what FEMA says that the building was mis-designed, for one I doubt this is even true (it may be) but two it still would not cause this building to fall like this or fall period, to believe the offical line on seven is nothing but pure quakery.

 

[Sub-Zer0]

Chill out now boys, n let them respond

 

[Evo]

Larry Silverstein, the controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish the Solomon Bros. building, or WTC 7, late in the afternoon of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001.

In the documentary "America Rebuilds", aired September 2002, Silverstein makes the following statement;

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse." http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/PULLIT.mp3

Yes, they pulled the firefighting operation. Have you not read any of the official reports?

 

[Sub-Zer0]

Yes, they pulled the firefighting operation. Have you not read any of the official reports?

I've read them, however I QUESTION them, you should too, if you were really looking at this objective. If any of these numerous facts meant anything, you're facing the posibility of having the killers investigating themselves. Have you seen the videos? You're really saiying that it was not demolished.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fema_report.html

 

[Evo]

Here is the latest update from NIST

Working Collapse Hypothesis for WTC 7

If it remains viable upon further analysis, the working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7 suggests that it was a classic progressive collapse, including:

An Initiating Event
An initial local failure at the lower floors (below Floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event), which supported a large span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 ft2

A Vertical Progression at the East Side of the Building
Vertical progression of the initial local failure up to the east penthouse, as large floor bays were unable to redistribute the loads, bringing down the interior structure below the east penthouse

A Subsequent Horizontal Progression from the East to the West Side
Horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of Floors 5 and 7, that were much thicker than the rest of the floors), triggered by damage due to the vertical failure

Disproportionate Global Collapse
Events resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure

NIST has seen no evidence that the collapse of WTC 7 was caused by bombs, missiles, or controlled demolition.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC Part IIC - WTC 7 Collapse Final.pdf

 

[Sub-Zer0]

That is extremely far fetched. So you believe that? You believe fire brought down Seven?

 

[Evo]

That is extremely far fetched. So you believe that? You believe fire brought down Seven?

Yes, the facts are all there.

 

[Sub-Zer0]

Yes, the facts are all there.

Facts can be concocted, and evidence can be manufactured. Show me any other building that anything like this has ever happened in before. This is completely ridiculous,

 

[Evo]

Facts can be concocted, and evidence can be manufactured. Show me any other building that anything like this has ever happened in before. This is completely ridiculous,

Find a building that matches the damage specified in the report on WTC 7. Thinking that the building was demolished with explosives isn't even a possibility since no traces of explosives were found. I prefer fact over wild, baseless fabrications that make no sense.

Do you really expect someone to believe that Silverstein and the NY fire department deliberately imploded the building? (without explosives, no less)

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

 

[Sub-Zer0]

Find a building that matches the damage specified in the report on WTC 7. Thinking that the building was demolished with explosives isn't even a possibility since no traces of explosives were found. I prefer fact over wild, baseless fabrications that make no sense.

Do you really expect someone to believe that Silverstein and the NY fire department deliberately imploded the building? (without explosives, no less)

Who said it was the fire department. Bring me any steel framed building under ANY circumstances, that has fallen from fire, Fire Won't Melt it or weaken it, for goodness sake, take piece metal and hold it over a lighter, It doesen weaken from little fires from that, Look at the Windsor Building look at the WTC fire in 75, there throwing in an extraneous factor to create doubt in your mind, it's a VERY controlled process, but that's absolutley ridiculous, not only that, it has PULVERIZED CONCERETE, how are these little fires and ANY kind of design flaw in the building able to PULVERIZE CONCERETE? DESENTEGRATE IT. THink about it, what you're proposeing is ASBSOLTELY RIDICULOUS!

 

[outsider]

Find a building that matches the damage specified in the report on WTC 7. Thinking that the building was demolished with explosives isn't even a possibility since no traces of explosives were found. I prefer fact over wild, baseless fabrications that make no sense.

Do you really expect someone to believe that Silverstein and the NY fire department deliberately imploded the building? (without explosives, no less)

I personally question that some people can accept that a fire burning from the top of a building can cause the entire building to collapse in a matter of seconds. Just as the lunatics being closed minded, I find that there is an equal wall of resistance. When mythbusting, one cannot take government reports and documents as "word". Just as the bible is not a full and precise interpretation of history.

For example... Martha Stewart was convicted of conspiracy and obstruction of justice right? Due to a lack of evidence on other counts, this was the only offense she was charged with. So officially, she DID nothing else wrong... but it doesn't mean that she DIDN'T.

Now... let's apply some logic to what is truth... and I think you might see where these "howling mad murdock" guys are coming from. There are no other cases like 911... so there is a missing element of control to the experiment... but this doesn't mean that we can't work the equation some other way... so let's try to look elsewhere ok?

 

[Entropy]

For example, did you know vaccines have a mercury perservative in them which has irrefutable been linked to autism?

Yeah. That isn't news. It's been know for quite a while and has been delt with.

How about Depleted Uranium, the true culprit of Gulf War Syndrome, cause seven to ten the birth deffects, and tripple the cancer rates in Iraq? Did you know about that?

As a matter of fact I did. This is all old news and well known. C'mon, tell me a real cover-up story and not 10 year old news from CNN.

Is this a point?

Yes. You said that we didn't know anything about this "shadowy group" and I was making a point to prove you wrong.

LOL, NO! I'm saying the entire central Colum would have to be destroyed to achieve this

Okay, bring up a credible demolition site that says a building can't fall down that fast with the central column intact.

Steel weakening at 2000 degrees and offered several scholarly links to supporate this claim, and all you've said is, "I AM WRONG"

What? A link to forging sheets of steel? THATS DIFFERENT FROM CONSTRUCTION STEEL! Don't you get it!

Where's your link for that buddy?

Oh and you want a link? Fine. http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html

And btw Jet fuel only burns for 30 secconds to two minutes

There is no set time limit from how long fuel can burn. How fast it burns is a function of how much of the fuel is at ignition temperature and how much oxygen is present.

Facts can be concocted, and evidence can be manufactured.

Yeah, just like the conspiracy theorists have done.

design flaw in the building able to PULVERIZE CONCERETE?

It was pulverized from the FALL! Drop a piece of concrete from 1000ft and see what happens.

 

[Entropy]

the entire building to collapse in a matter of seconds

It was a matter of hours. Not seconds.

 

[Evo]

I personally question that some people can accept that a fire burning from the top of a building can cause the entire building to collapse in a matter of seconds.

What are you talking about? The fire wasn't at the top of the building, it was all through the building, you haven't read any of the reports?

 

[Burnsys]

What are you talking about? The fire wasn't at the top of the building, it was all through the building, you haven't read any of the reports?

you mean somenthing like this: http://reopen911.org/images/02.jpg ?

 

[0m3ga]

One thing for everyone to remember in this is that everyone is trying to put forward their argument and not considering the other - more trying to disprove it - its just a good idea to keep an open mind on this

i havnt seen anyone believe one piece of information that the other has provided while there is some pretty substansial evidence there to be read

and whoever the mod is who locked this thread - i respect what your doing - but don't you think its a bit bias? i mean asking those who are convinced it wasnt an inside job do they see any susbstantial evidence? - i think this really needs to be read by someone who isn't swayed to either side and let them decide if this is worth keeping up

IMO it definitely is...im learning from it...are you?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Okay, I've seen enough. Not long after 911 I watched a lengthy interview with one of the WTC designers - I think the chief architect. He stated that the buildings collapsed almost exactly on cue. This scenario had been studied to some extent and it was known that fire from jet fuel was capable of causing the collapses exactly as they happened. To the best of my knowledge this is an established fact.

To tell you the truth there are a few things about 911 that bug me, but I don't see the conspiracy theorist's arguments as credible. We have given this subject many chances but the arguments for a conspiracy always deny established facts from engineering and science.

Sorry folks but this subject is closed.