For Anyone Who Still Believes the Official Story of 9/11

[shadow7]

This site is an important resource for 9/11 FACTS, not theories....
http://tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_facts.html

Read this as well:

9/11 - ALL THE PROOF YOU NEED

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html (http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html)

[Rhandhular]

This site is an important resource for 9/11 FACTS, not theories....
http://tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_facts.html

Read this as well:

9/11 - ALL THE PROOF YOU NEED

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html (http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_-_all_the_proof_you_need.html)

Facts? Start throwing out these facts one by one and I will be happy to dispel them. Btw I liked page 6 from your link it contained a nice bigfoot theory. lol

[shadow7]

There are dozens of facts in the articles I sent. You can also get contact information there to challenge the editor of TVNL with your brilliance. What are your credentials that you can challenge the physicists and other scholars who have debunked the official story? Of course, you're ready to support your claim.

The editor at TVNL has openly challenged anyone to debate him anywhere at anytime. Let's see if you'll do that. Yeah, right.

editor@tvnewslies.org Write to him. Post his answer. Let's see what you do.

[Conan21]

I would not waiste my time with what you are doing. I agree with what you have to say. But lets be honest here. Not many people view this board and all you are going to do is post untill your blue in the face to Rhandular. He won't address 60% of your topics and then plays word games and tic tac toe with the other 40%.

If you want to spread the word to people I would do so in real life to people you know. What is the point of arguing with Rhandular?

He and agent smith said anyone who questions the official story is a "Crack-Smoker" and we both know that the primary reason there was a Commision's Report in the first place was b/c of heat from family members of victims who suspected foul play and many of these people who still want answers are the victims. It is one thing to disagree. But for Rhandular and agent smith to refer to family members of victims as "crack smoking idiots" shows their level of disrespect and ignorance we are dealing with here.

[Big A]

I would not waiste my time with what you are doing. I agree with what you have to say. But lets be honest here. Not many people view this board.

We actually get an average of 12,000 unique visitors per month. That's 12,000 different people that read this site each month. And that's steadily growing as we are right at the top of Google.

[Rhandhular]

There are dozens of facts in the articles I sent. You can also get contact information there to challenge the editor of TVNL with your brilliance. What are your credentials that you can challenge the physicists and other scholars who have debunked the official story? Of course, you're ready to support your claim.

The editor at TVNL has openly challenged anyone to debate him anywhere at anytime. Let's see if you'll do that. Yeah, right.

editor@tvnewslies.org Write to him. Post his answer. Let's see what you do.

Email sent. This is my response to him.

So what is this truth to 9/11? The bullshit you spread is disrespectful to families of the victims that lost their lives on 9/11 and I would gladly debate you on the subject any day of the week.


Apparently you lack the ability to debate the subject yourself but should you decide to debate the issue lets do it topic by topic. Don't throw 20 of them out at a time and expect them to all get answered. I await your reply.

[Rhandhular]

I would not waiste my time with what you are doing. I agree with what you have to say. But lets be honest here. Not many people view this board and all you are going to do is post untill your blue in the face to Rhandular. He won't address 60% of your topics and then plays word games and tic tac toe with the other 40%.

If you want to spread the word to people I would do so in real life to people you know. What is the point of arguing with Rhandular?

.
I addressed your topics in a previous thread. I proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Willie Brown received no specific warning to fly on 9/11. I disproved all your other lame theories as well. I would think that calling myself and Smith ignorant would be in violation of board rules but it just goes to show you when these conspiracy guys can't attack the message that is being sent they attack the messenger. lol

[Rhandhular]

But for Rhandular and agent smith to refer to family members of victims as "crack smoking idiots" shows their level of disrespect and ignorance we are dealing with here.

Show me where I stated this. This is a blatant lie and a good indicator of how you are willing to twist information to suit your needs. You have zero credibility.

[Rhandhular]

The editor at TVNL has openly challenged anyone to debate him anywhere at anytime. Let's see if you'll do that. Yeah, right.



The mysterious editor that only is identified as Jesse. This guy is so credentialed he can't even reveal his entire name. WTF? Some anonymous guy on the net puts out 9/11 conspiracy theories and you believe it without any type of proof. Give me a break.

Show me the credentials of these experts you speak of.

[Conan21]

Here is an example of how you pick and choose. I'll just use this one since you metioned it above.

Willie Brown

the MYTH that you speak of was that Willie Brown was warned directly by Rice not to fly on 9/11. That is the MYTH that he spoke of. He said he did not recieve any warning directly from her BUT He did in fact receive a tip to be very cautious about flying on 9/11 the night before the attack (He had a scheduled flight to NYC on on 9/11). The article went on to say that he did not pay much attention to the warning and ended up watching the event on TV the next morning when he was getting ready. But he ABSOLUTELY did recieve a tip that americans should be very cautious about not flying on this day. The U.S gov't claims they had absolutely no prior knowledge of this event and would never concieve any one doing such a thing and were entirely caught completely off guard.

So what you did was to simply White Wash Willie Brown's warning and did not address the other people who mysteriously cancel the travel to NYC.

This is what I mean by you pick and choose which items to address and then play word games as you did with the willie Brown warning. You did this through the entire debate I had with you.

Just looking through the last page of our discussion, I pointed out these two points of Prior knowledge and did not address them. Again they have stated there were absolutely no warning signs what so ever.

The Phoenix Memo was a warning from the FBI sent to Washington DC in July 2001 saying that Bin Laden operatives were training at Phoenix flights school and at risk of hijacking airliners.

Zacarious Moussaoui was training in MN when his teachers noticed he wasn't interested in taking off or landing and sent out another warning. He was arrested in August of 2001 but the FBI was denied access to his laptop which had the 9/11 plot inside it. Why were they denied access? and who denied it?

I also posted video of the molten steel at ground zero. You did not address that.

You did this through the entire Thread

[Conan21]

I suggest you watch this video created by 9/11 victims and what they had to go through to get a formal investigation (911 CR).

9/11 Press for the Truth
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3979568779414136481&q=press+for+the+truth&hl=en

These are the people Agent Smith lumps in with the "Crack Smokers", and you later applauded his statement.

Leaving all physical Evidence a side and putting all conpiracy theories a side. An entire case of Prior knowledge can be created by the evidence. They made it very clear in their "Project for a New American Century" memo that their agendas would not be possible without a "New Pearl Harbor"

[agentsmith]

Show me where I stated this. This is a blatant lie and a good indicator of how you are willing to twist information to suit your needs. You have zero credibility.Just a select few who problably belive we didn't land on the moon either.....c'mon Conan if YOU have access to all this "credible" info and the evil plot is so blatant, don't you think more "sensible" people such as yourself would bring this out into the light? Or is it such "crack" pot stuff that no one in his right mind would give it the time of day? Watch out Conan the black helicopters are following you! LOL!:rolleyes:

[Rhandhular]

I suggest you watch this video created by 9/11 victims and what they had to go through to get a formal investigation (911 CR).

9/11 Press for the Truth
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3979568779414136481&q=press+for+the+truth&hl=en

These are the people Agent Smith lumps in with the "Crack Smokers", and you later applauded his statement.

Leaving all physical Evidence a side and putting all conpiracy theories a side. An entire case of Prior knowledge can be created by the evidence. They made it very clear in their "Project for a New American Century" memo that their agendas would not be possible without a "New Pearl Harbor"

No it just say's its from "The families" The families of what. Jeez. Get some better sources.

[Rhandhular]

Just a select few who problably belive we didn't land on the moon either.....c'mon Conan if YOU have access to all this "credible" info and the evil plot is so blatant, don't you think more "sensible" people such as yourself would bring this out into the light? Or is it such "crack" pot stuff that no one in his right mind would give it the time of day? Watch out Conan the black helicopters are following you! LOL!:rolleyes:
You speak the truth smith.

[Rhandhular]

Email sent. This is my response to him.

So what is this truth to 9/11? The bullshit you spread is disrespectful to families of the victims that lost their lives on 9/11 and I would gladly debate you on the subject any day of the week.


Apparently you lack the ability to debate the subject yourself but should you decide to debate the issue lets do it topic by topic. Don't throw 20 of them out at a time and expect them to all get answered. I await your reply.

Apparently jesse is not willing to debate me because as of yet I have failed to receive a reply from him. Imagine that. Another fraud in the 9/11 conspiracy scheme.

[Rhandhular]

Here is an example of how you pick and choose. I'll just use this one since you metioned it above.

Willie Brown

the MYTH that you speak of was that Willie Brown was warned directly by Rice not to fly on 9/11. That is the MYTH that he spoke of. He said he did not recieve any warning directly from her BUT He did in fact receive a tip to be very cautious about flying on 9/11 the night before the attack (He had a scheduled flight to NYC on on 9/11). The article went on to say that he did not pay much attention to the warning and ended up watching the event on TV the next morning when he was getting ready. But he ABSOLUTELY did recieve a tip that americans should be very cautious about not flying on this day. The U.S gov't claims they had absolutely no prior knowledge of this event and would never concieve any one doing such a thing and were entirely caught completely off guard.

So what you did was to simply White Wash Willie Brown's warning and did not address the other people who mysteriously cancel the travel to NYC.

This is what I mean by you pick and choose which items to address and then play word games as you did with the willie Brown warning. You did this through the entire debate I had with you.

Just looking through the last page of our discussion, I pointed out these two points of Prior knowledge and did not address them. Again they have stated there were absolutely no warning signs what so ever.

The Phoenix Memo was a warning from the FBI sent to Washington DC in July 2001 saying that Bin Laden operatives were training at Phoenix flights school and at risk of hijacking airliners.

Zacarious Moussaoui was training in MN when his teachers noticed he wasn't interested in taking off or landing and sent out another warning. He was arrested in August of 2001 but the FBI was denied access to his laptop which had the 9/11 plot inside it. Why were they denied access? and who denied it?

I also posted video of the molten steel at ground zero. You did not address that.

You did this through the entire Thread You conveniently omit all the info I debunked but that is ok.

[Rhandhular]

This is an interesting editorial I found. It is rather long and I doubt Conan will actually read it but it is an accurate assessment of 9/11 and the goof balls that think our Government was behind this plot.


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

November 28, 2006

The Age of Irrationality

The 9/11 Conspiracists and the Decline of the Anmerican Left

By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

Where was the American left in the campaign that ended in recapture of both houses of Congress by the Democrats on November 7, 2006? Was it in the streets, fomenting opposition to the war in Iraq? Not at all. The antiwar movement has been inert for months. When I was asked to give the keynote speech at a rare antiwar rally in my local town of Eureka, northern California, in early October, three of my five fellow orators didn't deign to mention the war at all. Instead they numbed the audience and sharply diminished its <myspace>size</myspace> with interminable dissections of the 9/11/2001 attacks on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. Their aim? To argue that the attacks were an "inside job", organized by Bush and Cheney or (a frequent variation on the theme) darker powers, for whom Bush and Cheney are the mere errand boys.

Five years after the attacks, 9/11 conspiracism has now penetrated deep into the American left. It is also widespread on the libertarian and populist right, but that is scarcely surprising, since the American populist right instinctively mistrusts government to a far greater degree than the left, and matches conspiracies to its demon of preference, whether the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Black Helicopters or the Jews.

These days a dwindling number of leftists learn their political economy from Marx via the small, mostly Trotskyist groupuscules. Into the theoretical and strategic void has crept a diffuse, peripatic conspiracist view of the world that tends to locate ruling class devilry not in the crises of capital accumulation, or the falling rate of profit, or inter-imperial competition, but in locale (the Bohemian Grove, Bilderberg, Ditchley, Davos) or supposedly "rogue" agencies, with the CIA still at the head of the list. The 9/11 "conspiracy", or "inside job", is the Summa of all this foolishness.

One trips over a fundamental idiocy of the 9/11 conspiracists in the first paragraph of the opening page of the book by one of their high priests, David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor. "In many respects, " Griffin writes, "the strongest evidence provided by critics of the official account involves the events of 9/11 itself In light of standard procedures for dealing with hijacked airplanes not one of these planes should have reached its target, let alone all three of them."

The operative word here is "should". A central characteristic of the conspiracists is that they have a devout, albeit preposterous belief in American efficiency. Many of them start with the racist premise--frequently voiced in as many words in their writings -- that "Arabs in caves" weren't capable of the mission. They believe that military systems should work they way Pentagon press flacks and aerospace salesmen say they should work. They believe that at 8.14 am, when AA flight 11 switched off its radio and transponder, an FAA flight controller should have called the National Military Command center and NORAD. They believe, citing reverently (this is high priest Griffin) "the US Air Force's own website, " that an F-15 could have intercepted AA flight 11 "by 8.24, and certainly no later than 8.30."

They appear to have read no military history, which is too bad because if they did they'd know that minutely planned operations--let alone by-the-book responses to an unprecedented emergency -- screw up with monotonous regularity, by reason of stupidity, cowardice, venality and all the other failings, not excepting sudden changes in the weather.

History is generous with such examples. According to the minutely prepared plans of the Strategic Air Command, an impending Soviet attack would have prompted the missile siloes in North Dakota to open, and the ICBMs to arc towards Moscow and kindred targets. The four test launches actually attempted all failed, whereupon the SAC gave up testing. Was it badly designed equipment, human incompetence, defense contractor venality or conspiracy?

Did the April 24, 1980 effort to rescue the hostages in the US embassy in Teheran fail because a sandstorm disabled three of the eight helicopters, or because the helicopters were poorly made, or because of agents of William Casey and the Republican National Committee poured sugar into their gas tanks in yet another conspiracy?

Have the US military's varying attempts to explain why F-15s didn't intercept and shoot down the hijacked planes stemmed from absolutely predictable attempts to cover up the usual screw-ups, or because of conspiracy? Is Mr Cohen in his little store at the end of the block hiking his prices because he wants to make a buck, or because his rent just went up or because the Jews want to take over the world? Bebel said anti-Semitism is the socialism of the fools. These days the 9/11 conspiracy fever threatens to be the dominant politics of the left.

It's awful. My in-box overflows each day with fresh "proofs" of how the WTC buildings were actually demolished, often accompanied by harsh insults identifying me as a "gate-keeper" preventing the truth from getting out. I meet people who start quietly, asking me "what I think about 9/11". What they are actually trying to find out is whether I'm part of the coven. I imagine it was like being a Stoic in the second century A.D. going for a stroll in the Forum and meeting some fellow asking, with seeming casualness, whether it's possible to feed 5, 000 people on five loaves of bread and a couple of fish.

Indeed, at my school in the 1950s the vicar used to urge on us Frank Morison's book, Who Moved The Stone? It sought to demonstrate, with exhaustive citation from the Gospels, that since on these accounts no human had moved the stone from in front of Joseph of Arimathea's tomb, it must beyond the shadow of a doubt have been an angel who rolled it aside and let Jesus out, so he could astonish the mourners and then Ascend. Of course Morison didn't admit into his argument the possibility that angels don't exist, or that the gospel writers were making it up.
It's the same pattern with the 9/11 conspiracists, who proffer what they demurely call "disturbing questions", though they disdain all answers but their own. They seize on coincidences and force them into sequences they deem to be logical and significant. Like mad Inquisitors, they pounce on imagined clues in documents and photos, torturing the data - as the old joke goes about economists -- till the data confess. Their treatment of eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence is whimsical. Apparent anomalies that seem to nourish their theories are brandished excitedly; testimony that undermines their theories--like witnesses of a large plane hitting the Pentagon -- is contemptuously brushed aside.

There are some photos of the impact of the "object" -- i.e. the Boeing 757, flight 77 -- that seem to show the sort of hole a missile might make. Ergo, 757 didn't hit the Pentagon. It WAS a missile. It wasn't smoke in some photographs obscuring a larger rupture in the fortified Pentagon wall.
.
On this last matter, Chuck Spinney, now retired after years of brilliant government service exposing the Pentagon's budgetary outrages, tells me that "there ARE pictures taken of the 757 plane hitting Pentagon -- they were taken by the surveillance cameras at Pentagon's heliport, which was right next to impact point. I have seen themboth stills and moving pictures. I just missed seeing it personally, but the driver of the van I just got out of in South Parking saw it so closely that he could see the terrified faces of passengers in windows. I knew two people who were on the plane. One was ID'd by dental remains found in the Pentagon."

This won't faze the conspiracists. They're immune to any reality check. Spinney worked for the government They switched the dental records The Boeing 757 was flown to Nebraska for a rendez-vous with President Bush, who shot the passengers, burned the bodies on the tarmac and gave Spinney's friend's teeth to Dick Cheney to drop through a hole in his trousers amid the debris in the Pentagon.

In fact hundreds of people saw the plane -- people who know the difference between a plane and a cruise missile. The wreckage of the plane was hauled out from the site. Why does the obvious have to be proved? Would those who were wounded or who lost friends and colleagues that day would assist in the cover up of a missile strike? Why risk using a missile, when you had a plane in the air and - to take the bizarre construct of the conspiracists -- had successfully crashed (by remote control!) two into much more difficult targets--the Trade Towers?

How difficult is it to learn how to fly the jetliners if you didn't have to land them on a runway? The short answer from commercial pilots is: not very difficult. In fact, you can learn about all you need to know from spending a few weeks in front of the Flight Simulator computer program.

What do we make of Osama taking credit for the attacks? That he's still on the CIA payroll? And so it goes, on and on into the murk. But to what end? To prove that Bush and Cheney are capable of almost anything? Actually, what Bush and Cheney Bush haven't proved is the slightest degree of competence to pull anything like this off. They couldn't even manufacture weapons of mass destruction after US troops had invaded Iraq, and when any box labeled "WMD" would have been happily photographed by the embedded U.S. press as conclusive testimony.

At least what these recent elections may help to do is remind the left that Bush and Cheney are not that much different from the politicians and overlords of U.S. foreign policy who preceeded them or who will follow them. There was already a bi-partisan consensus about Israel, Iraq, et al.

Ultimately, the 9/11 conspiracists want us to believe that the Bush/Cheney gang is a new breed of evil. This might be the most dangerous deception of all, for it fosters the fantasy that a new adminstration, a Hillary or Gore administration, would pursue more humane policies

The WTC didn't fall down because they were badly built as a consequence of corruption, incompetence, regulatory evasions by the Port Authority, and because they were struck by huge planes loaded with jet fuel. No, shout the conspiracists, they "pancaked" because Dick Cheney's agents--scores of them--methodically planted demolition charges in the preceding days. It was a conspiracy of thousands, all of whom--party to mass murder--have held their tongues ever since.

Michael Neumann, a philosopher, and CounterPunch contributor, at the University of Trent, in Ontario, remarked in a note to me:
"I think the problem of conspiracy nuttery has got worse, and is part of a general trend. There really were serious questions about the Kennedy assassination, an unusual number of them, and it wasn't too crazy to come to the wrong conclusion. There wasn't a single serious question about 9-11. But this is the age of angels, creationism, corpses all over Kosovo, Arabs suspiciously speaking Arabic, Satanic child abuse, nucular Eyraquees, and channeling. The main engine of the 9-11 conspiracy cult is nothing political; it's the death of any conception of evidence.

"This probably comes from the decline of Western power. Deep down, almost everyone, across the political spectrum, is locked in a bigotry which can only attribute that decline to some irrational or supernatural power. The result is the ascendency of magic over common sense, let alone reason."

Anyone familiar with criminal, particularly death penalty defense--I had such an opportunity for a number of years--will know that there are always anomalies the prosecution cannot account for and that the defense teams can exploit, in hopes of swaying a jury either in the guilt or penalty phase of a trial. Time and again I would see the defense team spend days and weeks, even months, back-checking on a possibly vulnerable link in the evidentiary chain that could be attacked, at least to the all-important level of creating "reasonable doubt" in the mind of a juror. Expert witnesses would be imported at great expense - unlike states such as Texas, the justice system of California is generous in the provision of money for death penalty defense -- to challenge the prosecution's forensic evidence. Such challenges weren't hard to mount. Contrary to prosecutorial claims, there is far less intrinsic certainty in forensic evaluation than is commonly supposed, as regards fingerprints, landing marks on bullets and so forth.

But minute focus of a death penalty defense team on one such weak link often leads to a distorted view of the whole case. I remember more than one case where, after weeks of interviewing witnesses at one particular crime scene, the defense's investigator had collected enough witness reports to mount a decent attack on this aspect of the prosecution's overall case. At least this is what I thought, hearing the daily bulletins of the investigator. But whenthe camera pulled back, so to speak, and I saw the prosecution's whole case--chain of evidence, cumulative witness statements, accused's own movements and subsequent statements--it became clear enough to me and, in that case to the juries , that the accused were incontestably guilty. But even then, such cases had a vigorous afterlife, with the defense trying to muster up grounds for an appeal, on the basis of testimony and evidence withheld by the prosecution, faulty rulings by the judge, a prejudiced jury member and so on. A seemingly "cut and dried case" is very rarely beyond challenge, even though in essence it actually may well be just that, "cut and dried".

Anyone who ever looked at the JFK assassination will know that there are endless anomalies and loose ends. Eyewitness testimony is conflicting, forensic evidence possibly misconstrued, mishandled or just missing. But in my view, the Warren Commission, as confirmed in almost all essentials by the House Committee on Assassinations in the late 1970s, had it right and Oswald fired the fatal shots from the Schoolbook Depository. The evidentiary chain for his guilt is persuasive, and the cumulative scenarios of the conspiracists entirely unconvincing. But of course--as the years roll by, and even though no death bed confession has ever buttressed those vast, CIA-related scenarios -- the conspiracists keep on toiling away, their obsessions as unflagging as ever.

Of course there are conspiracies. I think there is strong evidence that FDR did have knowledge that a Japanese naval force in the north Pacific was going to launch an attack on Pearl Harbor. It's quite possible Roosevelt thought it would be a relatively mild assault and thought it would be the final green light to get the US into the war.

Indeed it's very probable that the FBI or US military intelligence, even the CIA, had penetrated the Al Qaeda team planning the 9/11 attacks; that intelligence reports--some are already known--piled up in various Washington bureaucracies pointing to the impending onslaught and even the manner in which it might be carried out.

The history of intelligence operations is profuse with example of successful intelligence collection, but also fatal slowness to act on the intelligence, along with eagerness not to compromise the security and future usefulness of the informant, who has to prove his own credentials by even pressing for prompt action by the plotters. Sometime an undercover agent will actually propose an action, either to deflect efforts away from some graver threat, or to put the plotters in a position where they can be caught red-handed. In their penetrations of environmental groups the FBI certainly did this.

Long before the 1973 Yom Kippur war, a CIA analyst noted Egyptian orders from a German engineering firm, and deduced from the type and <myspace>size</myspace> of equipment thus ordered that Egypt was planning an attack across the Suez canal. Why else would the Egyptians suddenly be ordering bridging materials. From the amounts being purchased and shipped he worked out the probable <myspace>size</myspace> of the Egyptian force and the likely time window for the attack. His superiors at the CIA sat on the report. When the Egyptian army finally attacked on October 6, 1973 the CIA high command ordered up the long-buried report, dusted it off and sent it over to the White House, marked "current intelligence". Was there a "conspiracy" by the CIA high command to allow Israel to be taken by surprise? I doubt it. Bureaucratic inertia and caution prevailed, until the moment came for decisive "cover your ass" activities.

The conspiracists make dizzying "deductive" leaps. There is a one particularly vigorous coven which has established to its own satisfaction that the original NASA moon landing was faked, and never took place. This "conspiracy" would have required the complicity of thousands of people , all of whom have kept their mouths shut. The proponents of the "fake moon landing" plot tend to overlap with the JFK and 9/11 crowds.

The "conspiracy" is always open-ended as to the number of conspirators, widening steadily to include all the people involved in the execution and cover-up of the demolition of the Towers and the onslaught on the Pentagon, from the teams acquiring the explosives and the missile, inserting the explosives in the relevant floors of three vast buildings, (moving day after day among the unsuspecting office workers), then on 9/11 activating the detonators. Subsequently the conspiracy includes the disposers of the steel and rubble, the waste recyclers in Staten Island and perhaps even the Chinese who took the salvaged incriminating metal for use in the Three Gorges dam, where it will submerged in water and concrete for ever. Tens of thousands of people, all silent as the tomb to this day.

The conspiracists simultaneously credit their targets--the Bush-Cheney "conspirators" -- with superhuman ingenuity and grotesque carelessness. In Webster Griffin Tarpley's book 9/11 Synthetic Terror Made in USA he writes that "in an interview with Parade magazine, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld also referred to the object which hit the Pentagon as a 'missile'. Was this a Freudian slip by the loquacious defense chief?"

The physicist and engineer Manuel Garcia Jr (whose explications furnish the bulk of our 9/11 file) reminds us that if the evidence allows for several explanations to a given problem then the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is most probably correct. This principle is called Occam's Razor, named after the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Occam.

There is not the slightest need to postulate pre-placed explosive charges to explain why the towers collapsed at near free fall speeds. Engineer Pierre Sprey--who designed the F-16 and A-10 -- points out a few practical aspects of explosive demolitions that make the explosive charge hypothesis improbable to the point of absurdity:

"1. Any demolitions expert concocting a plan to hit a tall building with an airplane and then use pre-placed explosives to UNDETECTABLY ensure the collapse of the building would never place the explosives 20, 30 and 60 floors below the impact point. Obviously, he would put the explosives on one or more floors as close as possible to the planned impact level.

"2. It is inconceivable that our demolitions expert would time his surreptitious explosions to occur HOURS after the aircraft impact. He couldn't possibly be absolutely certain that the impact fires would even last an hour. Quite the opposite: to mask the booster explosions, he'd time them to follow right on the heels of the impact.

"3. To ensure collapse of a major building requires very sizable demolition charges, charges that are large enough to do a lot more than emit the "puffs of smoke" cited as evidence for the explosives hypothesis. I've seen both live and filmed explosive building demolitions. Each explosion is accompanied by a very visible shower of heavy rubble and a dense cloud of smoke and dust. Just that fact alone makes the explosives hypothesis untenable; no demolitions expert in the world would be willing to promise his client that he could bring down a tall building with explosions guaranteed to be indistinguishable from the effects of an aircraft impact."

Herman Soifer, a retired structural engineer, summarize the collapse of Buildings 1 and 2 succinctly, in a letter to me, remarking that since he had followed the plans and engineering of the Towers during construction he was able to explain the collapses to his wife a few hours after the buildings went down.

"The towers were basically tubes, essentially hollow. Tubes can be very efficient structures, strong and economical. The Trade Center tubes effectively resisted vertical loads, wind loads and vibrations and could probably have done very well against earthquakes. However, the relatively thin skin of the hollow tube must be braced at intervals to prevent local buckling of the skin under various possible loads, otherwise the tube itself can go out of shape and lose its strength.

"For their interior bracing, the thin-walled tubes of the Trade Center towers depended primarily on the interior floors being tied to the outer wall shells. These floor beam structures were basically open web joists, adequate for the floor loads normally to be expected. These joist ends rested on steel angle clips attached to the outer walls.

"As the floors at the level of airplane impact caught fire, the open web joists, which could not be expected to resist such fires, softened under the heat, sagged and pulled away from their attachments to the walls. Their weight and the loads they were carrying, caused them to drop onto the next lower floor, which was then carrying double loads also becoming exposed to the heat. Then that floor collapsed, and so it went. But as the floors dropped, they no longer served as bracing for the thin-walled main tubes.

"This loss of bracing permitted the walls to buckle outward in successive sections and thus the house of cards effect.

"There was no other major bracing as would be encountered in a more conventional type of structure, or as might have been introduced in the design if one feared the potential loss of the floors. There were no stiff horizontal trusses in the perimeter to act as bracing ribs every few floors. There was no system of vertical trusses to provide any integrity, not was there anything that could be considered a frame or "skeleton" of columns and attached girders to keep the tube intact."

In our 9/11 file Manuel Garcia devastates with conspiracists' theories with patient explanations as to why their schemas flout scientific laws and the observed facts of the disasters of that day.

The conspiracists' last card is the collapse of WTC building number 7 some hours after the morning attacks. But here again, as with the other two buildings, the explanations offered by US government agencies (preeminently the National Institute of Standards and Technology and, for Building 7, FEMA) are more than adequate, as Manuel Garcia points out. The blast of hot debris from WTC 1 kindled fires in WTC 7 and caused an emergency power system to feed the burning to the point of building collapse.

One of the building's major bridging supports was heated to the point of exhaustion by the burning of an abundant store of hydrocarbon (diesel) fuel, pumped from the sub-basement by the back-up system and spraying through a torn pipe into the fire next to two of the building's three major structural truss. The types of steel used in the WTC Towers (plain carbon, and vanadium) lose steel lose half their strength when heated to about 570 C , and even more as temperatures rise, as they did in WTC 1 and 2, to 1100 C. In building 7, Garcia calculates that the diesel fuel spraying at a rate of 75 gallons a minute ultimately released energy equivalent to that of an explosion of 367 tons of TNT.

What is the goal of the 9/11 conspiracists? They ask questions, yes, but they never answer them. They never put forward an overall scenario of the alleged conspiracy. They say that's not up to them. So who is it up to? Who do they expect to answer their questions? When answers are put forward, they are dismissed as fabrications or they simply rebound with another question.

Of course the buildings didn't suddenly fall at a speed inexplicable in terms of physics unless caused by carefully pre-placed explosives, detonated by the ruthless Bush-Cheney operatives. High grade steel can bend disastrously under extreme heat. As discussed in Wayne Barrett and Dan Collin's excellent book Grand Illusion, about Rudy Giuliani and 9/11, helicopter pilots radioed warnings nine minutes before the final collapse that the South Tower might well go down and, repeatedly, as much as 25 minutes before the North Tower's fall.

What Barrett and Collins brilliantly show are the actual corrupt conspiracies on Giuliani's watch: the favoritism to Motorola which saddled the firemen with radios that didn't work; the ability of the Port Authority to skimp on fire protection, the mayor's catastrophic failure in the years before 9/11/2001 to organize an effective unified emergency command that would have meant that cops and firemen could have communicated; that many firemen wouldn't have unnecessarily entered the Towers; that people in the Towers wouldn't have been told by 911 emergency operators to stay in place; and that firemen could have heard the helicopter warnings and the final Mayday messages that prompted most of the NYPD men to flee the Towers.
That's the real political world, in which Giuliani and others have never been held accountable. The conspiracists disdain the real world because they have promoted Bush, Cheney and the Neo-Cons to an elevated status as the Arch Demons of American history, instead of being just one more team running the American empire, a team of more than usual stupidity and incompetence (characteristics I personally favor in imperial leaders). The conspiracists have combined to produce a huge distraction, just as Danny Sheehan did with his Complaint, that mesmerized and distracted much of the Nicaraguan Solidarity Movement in the 1980s, and which finally collapsed in a Florida courtroom almost as quickly as the Towers.

There are plenty of real conspiracies in America. Why make up fake ones? Every few years, property czars and city government in New York conspire to withhold fire company responses, so that enough of a neighborhood burns down for the poor to quit and for profitable gentrification to ensue. That's a conspiracy to commit ethnic cleansing, also murder.

It's happening today in Brooklyn, even as similar ethnic cleansing and gentrification is scheduled in San Francisco. Bayview Hunters Point is the last large black community in the Bay Area, sitting on beautiful bay front property. So now it's the time to move the black folks out. As Willie Ratcliff, publisher of the Bay View newspaper writes, "If the big developers and their puppets, the mayor [Democrat Gavin Newsom] and his minions win this war, they'll have made what may be the largest urban renewal land grab in the nation's history: some 2, 200 acres of San Francisco, the city with the highest priced land on earth."

That's an actual conspiracy, even as many in the Bay Area left meander through the blind alleys of 9/11 conspiratorialism.

Machiavelli points out that every conspirator you add to the plot has less chance of preserving secrecy than the previous one. The 9/11 group in fact did tell people about their plans in various ways but the prevailing belief that Arabs couldn't do it prevented any of the revelations from being taken seriously. The view that a bunch of Arabs with box cutters couldn't do it was precisely the cover they needed.

The conspiracy virus is an old strand:

The Russians couldn't possibly build an A bomb without Commie traitors. The Russians are too dumb. Hitler couldn't have been defeated by the Red Army marching across Eastern Europe and half Germany. Traitors let it happen. JFK couldn't have been shot by Oswald -- it had to be the CIA. RFK couldn't have been shot by Sirhan--it had to be the CIA. There are no end to examples seeking to prove that Russians, Arabs, Viet Cong, Japanese, etc etc couldn't possibly match the brilliance and cunning of secret cabals of white Christians. It's all pathetic but it does save the trouble of reading and thinking.

Yet some discover a silver lining in the 9/11 conspiracism. A politically sophisticated leftist in Washington, DC, wrote to me recently, agreeing with my ridiculing of the "inside job" scenarios, but adding, "To me the most interesting thing (in the US) is how many people are willing to believe that Bush either masterminded it [the 9/11 attacks] or knew in advance and let it happen. If that number or anything close to that is true, that's a huge base of people that are more than deeply cynical about their elected officials. That would be the real news story that the media is missing, and it's a big one."

"I'm not sure I see the silver lining about cynicism re government, " I answered. "People used to say the same thing about the JFK conspiracy buffs and disbelief in the Warren Commission. Actually, it seems to demobilize people from useful political activity. If the alleged perpetrators are so efficiently devilish in their plots, all resistance is futile. As Michael Snedeker, a lawyer who spends much of his professional life trying to save accused murderers from the death penalty, wrote to me about the 9/11 conspiracists:

"I completely agree with your take on the 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Of course, it would be an outrage if such monstrous, complicated schemes were hatched and carried out so smoothly, but it would be somehow worse if no one at all was orchestrating the whole piece. There is definitely a theological motor driving that train--a need for Order and Design. The power of forces like Ineptitude, Sloth, Distraction & Resentment are routinely overlooked. We all know them in our own lives, but somehow, it is assumed by analysts of all stripes that office-holders and Boards of Directors, etc., are immune. Ha! At the risk of going all Freudian here, I think such theories are another reflection of the deep desire for an all-knowing Father, & the terror of being one of a band of brothers and sisters, with no one other than ourselves to guide us."

As for the theological motor, note that Griffin is a theologian, and his latest book put out by a publisher connected to the Presbyterian church--a fact which does not sit well with many Presbyterians, though 9/11 conspiracists have hailed the association as evidence that protestant America is rallying to their standard. Maybe the Heavenly Father decided to destroy Babel and start again. As Garcia wryly remarks at the end of second essay, on the thermodynamics of 9/11: "In the enormity of each rubble pile, with its massive quantity of stored heat, many effects were possible in small quantities, given time to incubate. It is even possible that in some little puddle buried deep in the rubble, warmed for months in an oven-like enclosure of concrete rocks, bathed in an atmosphere of methane, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and perhaps a touch of oxygen, that DNA was formed."

9/11 conspiracism stems from despair and political infantilism. There's no worthwhile energy to transfer from such kookery. It's like saying some lunatic shouting to himself on a street corner has the capacity to be a great orator. As Garcia suggests, the nearest thing to it all is the Flying Saucer craze of the 1950s, born of fears of atomic war. It's a Jungian thing.

Richard Aldrich's book on British intelligence, The Hidden Hand (2002), describes how a report for the Pentagon on declassification recommended that "interesting declassified material" such as information about the JFK assassination "could be released and even posted on the Internet, as a 'diversion, '" and used to "reduce the unrestrained public appetite for 'secrets' by providing good faith distraction material". Aldrich adds, "If investigative journalists and contemporary historians were absorbed with the vexatious, but rather tired, debates over the grassy knoll, they would not be busy probing into areas where they were unwelcome."

By the same token, I'm sure that the Bush gang, and all the conspirators of capital, are delighted at the obsessions of the 9/11 conspiracists. It's a distraction from the 1, 001 real plots of capitalism that demand exposure and political challenge.

"The tendency to occultism is a symptom of regression in consciousness", Adorno wrote in Minima Moralia. . "The veiled tendency of society towards disaster lulls its victims in a false revelation, with a hallucinated phenomenon. In vain they hope in its fragmented blatancy to look their total doom in the eye and withstand it The offal of the phenomenal world becomes, to sick consciousness, the mundus intelligibilis."

Footnote: I should add that one particular conspiracist, seeing that Roosevelt's grandson Ford--a schoolteacher in Los Angeles--was for a while, some years ago, on the board of CounterPunch's parent non-profit, the Institute for the Advancement of Journalistic Clarity -- wrote an enormous onslaught on CounterPunch a while ago, "proving" to his own satisfaction that CounterPunch was a pawn of the Democratic Party, the CIA and kindred darker forces. I suppose the fact that CounterPunch attacked the Democratic Party and the CIA on a weekly basis was just one more example of our cunning in deflecting suspicion away from our true sponsors. The fact that from time to time that we also quite regularly attacked FDR--and posited his foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor--should again be taken as evidence of our stratagems in trying to obscure Ford's supervisory role in our affairs. In fact we'd put Ford on the board in the hopes (vain, as they turned out to be) that he would persuade film stars to give CounterPunch money.

CounterPunch Special Report: Debunking the Myths of 9/11
Alexander Cockburn here assembles his two prime commentaries in a final, expanded essay, "The 9/11 Conspiracists and the Decline of the Left."

Manuel Garcia Jr, physicist and engineer, presents his three separate reports, undertaken for CounterPunch.

Part One is his report on the Physics of 9/11.

Part Two (published here for the first time) is his report on the Thermodynamics of 9/11.

Part Three, "Dark Fire", is his report on the collapse of the World Trade Center's Building 7.

JoAnn Wypijewski wrote her essay "Conversations at Ground Zero" after a day spent with people at the site on 9/11/2006.

[Rhandhular]

There are dozens of facts in the articles I sent. You can also get contact information there to challenge the editor of TVNL with your brilliance. What are your credentials that you can challenge the physicists and other scholars who have debunked the official story? Of course, you're ready to support your claim.

The editor at TVNL has openly challenged anyone to debate him anywhere at anytime. Let's see if you'll do that. Yeah, right.

editor@tvnewslies.org Write to him. Post his answer. Let's see what you do.

He is a yellow bellied coward and will not return my emails. I anxiously await the opportunity to destroy your icon but it seems he is not actually willing to debate me!!:D

[agentsmith]

"The tendency to occultism is a symptom of regression in consciousness", Adorno wrote in Minima Moralia. . "The veiled tendency of society towards disaster lulls its victims in a false revelation, with a hallucinated phenomenon. In vain they hope in its fragmented blatancy to look their total doom in the eye and withstand it The offal of the phenomenal world becomes, to sick consciousness, the mundus intelligibilis."

The Russians couldn't possibly build an A bomb without Commie traitors. The Russians are too dumb. Hitler couldn't have been defeated by the Red Army marching across Eastern Europe and half Germany. Traitors let it happen. JFK couldn't have been shot by Oswald -- it had to be the CIA. RFK couldn't have been shot by Sirhan--it had to be the CIA. There are no end to examples seeking to prove that Russians, Arabs, Viet Cong, Japanese, etc etc couldn't possibly match the brilliance and cunning of secret cabals of white Christians. It's all pathetic but it does save the trouble of reading and thinking.

The conspiracists make dizzying "deductive" leaps. There is a one particularly vigorous coven which has established to its own satisfaction that the original NASA moon landing was faked, and never took place. This "conspiracy" would have required the complicity of thousands of people , all of whom have kept their mouths shut. The proponents of the "fake moon landing" plot tend to overlap with the JFK and 9/11 crowds.

These are just three of the paragraphs that sum up the total foolishness and stupidity of people who WANT to belive something so assinine. Hillary will save us huh? LOL! Conan you should be putting all this energy into ways of defeating terrorism not perpetuating it:mad:

[Rhandhular]

"The tendency to occultism is a symptom of regression in consciousness", Adorno wrote in Minima Moralia. . "The veiled tendency of society towards disaster lulls its victims in a false revelation, with a hallucinated phenomenon. In vain they hope in its fragmented blatancy to look their total doom in the eye and withstand it The offal of the phenomenal world becomes, to sick consciousness, the mundus intelligibilis."

The Russians couldn't possibly build an A bomb without Commie traitors. The Russians are too dumb. Hitler couldn't have been defeated by the Red Army marching across Eastern Europe and half Germany. Traitors let it happen. JFK couldn't have been shot by Oswald -- it had to be the CIA. RFK couldn't have been shot by Sirhan--it had to be the CIA. There are no end to examples seeking to prove that Russians, Arabs, Viet Cong, Japanese, etc etc couldn't possibly match the brilliance and cunning of secret cabals of white Christians. It's all pathetic but it does save the trouble of reading and thinking.

The conspiracists make dizzying "deductive" leaps. There is a one particularly vigorous coven which has established to its own satisfaction that the original NASA moon landing was faked, and never took place. This "conspiracy" would have required the complicity of thousands of people , all of whom have kept their mouths shut. The proponents of the "fake moon landing" plot tend to overlap with the JFK and 9/11 crowds.

These are just three of the paragraphs that sum up the total foolishness and stupidity of people who WANT to belive something so assinine. Hillary will save us huh? LOL! Conan you should be putting all this energy into ways of defeating terrorism not perpetuating it:mad:

Nice Smith!!

Here is a video for you Truthers that features the producers of loose change debating Mark Roberts. Enjoy...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=142975074341498508

[Conan21]

So it is your opinion that the official history of our planet and all the events that have happend on earth are all accurately recorded?

There are are no hidden/occult/secret/alternative histories? Because it would take too many people to cover up anything that would be on a grand scale?

I'm not sure how many conspirators it would take to cover up the events you proposed. My guess is that it would not be thousands as you say.

How many conspirators do you think it took to create a fake religion called Christiany and keep it a relative secret for 2,000 years?

[Rhandhular]

So it is your opinion that the official history of our planet and all the events that have happend on earth are all accurately recorded?

There are are no hidden/occult/secret/alternative histories? Because it would take too many people to cover up anything that would be on a grand scale?

I'm not sure how many conspirators it would take to cover up the events you proposed. My guess is that it would not be thousands as you say.

How many conspirators do you think it took to create a fake religion called Christiany and keep it a relative secret for 2,000 years?

The official history of our planet has nothing to do with 9/11. Focus on the subject and try not to go off on tangents.

I didn't propose a cover up at all. You did and yes it would be massive. The more you debate the subject the larger it will get.

I don't know anything about conspirators and Christianity and frankly I don't even care. Stay on topic.

[Conan21]

"The tendency to occultism is a symptom of regression in consciousness", Adorno wrote in Minima Moralia. . "The veiled tendency of society towards disaster lulls its victims in a false revelation, with a hallucinated phenomenon. In vain they hope in its fragmented blatancy to look their total doom in the eye and withstand it The offal of the phenomenal world becomes, to sick consciousness, the mundus intelligibilis."

The Russians couldn't possibly build an A bomb without Commie traitors. The Russians are too dumb. Hitler couldn't have been defeated by the Red Army marching across Eastern Europe and half Germany. Traitors let it happen. JFK couldn't have been shot by Oswald -- it had to be the CIA. RFK couldn't have been shot by Sirhan--it had to be the CIA. There are no end to examples seeking to prove that Russians, Arabs, Viet Cong, Japanese, etc etc couldn't possibly match the brilliance and cunning of secret cabals of white Christians. It's all pathetic but it does save the trouble of reading and thinking.

The conspiracists make dizzying "deductive" leaps. There is a one particularly vigorous coven which has established to its own satisfaction that the original NASA moon landing was faked, and never took place. This "conspiracy" would have required the complicity of thousands of people , all of whom have kept their mouths shut. The proponents of the "fake moon landing" plot tend to overlap with the JFK and 9/11 crowds.

These are just three of the paragraphs that sum up the total foolishness and stupidity of people who WANT to belive something so assinine. Hillary will save us huh? LOL! Conan you should be putting all this energy into ways of defeating terrorism not perpetuating it:mad:

This is where my reply was directed. Read all the posts before you add a remark. It saves money on bandwidth.

also, History has Everything to do with it.

[Rhandhular]

This is where my reply was directed. Read all the posts before you add a remark. It saves money on bandwidth.

also, History has Everything to do with it.

Nope. Wrong again.

[Rhandhular]

H
I also posted video of the molten steel at ground zero. You did not address that.



Ask to be enlightened and I shall enlighten you...

Photographs that we have examined purporting to show demolition equipment extracting "molten steel" from the debris at ground zero are inconclusive at best, and most are inaccurate as described. Extracting various hot molten compounds or debris is one thing, but "molten steel beams" is quite another. As a fundamental point, if an excavator or a grapple ever dug into a pile of molten steel heated to an excess of 2000 degrees Fahrenheit it would lose its ability to function. At a minimum the hydraulics would immediately fail and its moving parts would bond up or seize together. The heat would then quickly transfer through the steel components of the excavator and there would be concern for its operator. The photos we have reviewed on various websites do not show any of this, and if anything, indicate that the underground fires- while very hot- were not enough to melt steel.

http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf

But wait there is more...

Jones: “Who can deny that liquid, molten metal existed at the WTC disaster? The yellow color implies a molten-metal temperature of approximately 1000 oC, evidently above that which the dark-smoke hydrocarbon fires in the Towers could produce. If aluminum (e.g., from the plane) had melted, it would melt and flow away from the heat source at its melting point of about 650 oC and thus would not reach the yellow color observed for this molten metal. Thus, molten aluminum is already ruled out with high probability.”



To rule out aluminium so quickly is poor science, because we don’t know what the temperatures were in the impact zone, while we do know that many metric tonnes of aluminium constituting the plane were in the area just above the outflow of molten metal. Of course, the alternative hypothesis, that the molten metal was iron or steel, should be also considered carefully. The argument of Jones is that if the molten metal were steel, then it would support the CD theory. But the link between molten steel and controlled demolition is non-existent, as thermite is not used in controlled demolition. Hence Jones requires a variation on controlled demolition: controlled demolition plus the use gratuitous and incompetent use of thermite. We have to believe that the conspirators had researched controlled demolition so badly as to decide on the use of thermite. Now, Jones estimates that “Roughly 2,000 pounds of RDX-grade linear-shaped charges” would be sufficient to bring the building down, and such a quantity of explosive might conceivably have been hidden in each of the towers. But the quantity of thermite required to produce this stream of molten metal is much greater. 107 Kg of thermite is required to produce 54 Kg of molten iron, and the stream of molten metal flowing from the impact zone (if iron) has been estimated at thousands of kilograms. Even if the stream is only 1,000 kg of iron, then 2,000 kg, or two metric tonnes, of thermite would be required. But the CD hypothesis implies much more than this. For a start the thermite would have been distributed over the proposed target floor for initial collapse, so it would be very difficult for the molten iron products to pool in one place and pour out. Secondly, the CD hypothesis agrees that the floor(s) of impact of the plane could not have been exactly predicted, so every, say, 5 floors, another couple of metric tonnes of thermite would be required. (Jones: ‘… to make it appear that the planes somehow initiated the collapse; cutter-charges could have been pre-placed at numerous spots in the building, since one would not know exactly where the planes would enter.’) Even if only the top half of the building were so prepared, then we would anticipate 2 metric tonnes x 11 locations or 22 tonnes. If the mass of stream of molten metal were estimated at more like 10,000 kg of iron then the figure goes up to 220 tonnes of thermite. We have to believe (a) that the conspirators were ignorant enough to attempt to use thermite, and (b) could insinuate between 22 and 220 tonnes of thermite, plus charges, plus radio firing systems, into each tower.



If in addition, thermite is required by the CD hypothesis to account for the molten steel in the basement after collapse, then we have to add an addition two tonnes of thermite for every tonne of molten iron. The problem for the CD theory is in fact that no reliable estimates exist of the amount of molten metal, if any, in the basements.



To sum up, it is a tough job to for the CD hypothesis to account for the stream of molten metal as iron produced from thermite reaction because (a) the choice of thermite requires the conspirators to be incompetent, (b) pooling of the molten iron would require the odd concentration of thermite on a given floor in one location, and (c) the quantity needed (22-220 tonnes) would be hard to smuggle in and hide in the building. This quantity increases by two tonnes per every tonne of molten steel estimated to be in the basements.



The IF hypothesis suggests that the molten metal is aluminium (and other alloys used in plane construction), and that it pooled in that location because that is where the plane was. As Jones rightly point out however, the IF hypothesis would require the molten aluminium (and alloys) to attain temperatures several hundred degrees above melting point. The IF hypothesis also requires that the molten steel in the basement have been heated by a combination of fire and mgh energy, so much rests on estimates of those factors.



I want to add a hypothesis that may yet explain the high temperatures, and would need to be disproved by the CD theorists: that some of the aluminium in the planes was ignited on impact. I return to this issue later on.


http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm


Molten Steel thoery at ground zero address and dispelled. Next question please...

[Conan21]

Ask to be enlightened and I shall enlighten you...

Photographs that we have examined purporting to show demolition equipment extracting "molten steel" from the debris at ground zero are inconclusive at best, and most are inaccurate as described. Extracting various hot molten compounds or debris is one thing, but "molten steel beams" is quite another. As a fundamental point, if an excavator or a grapple ever dug into a pile of molten steel heated to an excess of 2000 degrees Fahrenheit it would lose its ability to function. At a minimum the hydraulics would immediately fail and its moving parts would bond up or seize together. The heat would then quickly transfer through the steel components of the excavator and there would be concern for its operator. The photos we have reviewed on various websites do not show any of this, and if anything, indicate that the underground fires- while very hot- were not enough to melt steel.

http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf

But wait there is more...

Jones: “Who can deny that liquid, molten metal existed at the WTC disaster? The yellow color implies a molten-metal temperature of approximately 1000 oC, evidently above that which the dark-smoke hydrocarbon fires in the Towers could produce. If aluminum (e.g., from the plane) had melted, it would melt and flow away from the heat source at its melting point of about 650 oC and thus would not reach the yellow color observed for this molten metal. Thus, molten aluminum is already ruled out with high probability.”



To rule out aluminium so quickly is poor science, because we don’t know what the temperatures were in the impact zone, while we do know that many metric tonnes of aluminium constituting the plane were in the area just above the outflow of molten metal. Of course, the alternative hypothesis, that the molten metal was iron or steel, should be also considered carefully. The argument of Jones is that if the molten metal were steel, then it would support the CD theory. But the link between molten steel and controlled demolition is non-existent, as thermite is not used in controlled demolition. Hence Jones requires a variation on controlled demolition: controlled demolition plus the use gratuitous and incompetent use of thermite. We have to believe that the conspirators had researched controlled demolition so badly as to decide on the use of thermite. Now, Jones estimates that “Roughly 2,000 pounds of RDX-grade linear-shaped charges” would be sufficient to bring the building down, and such a quantity of explosive might conceivably have been hidden in each of the towers. But the quantity of thermite required to produce this stream of molten metal is much greater. 107 Kg of thermite is required to produce 54 Kg of molten iron, and the stream of molten metal flowing from the impact zone (if iron) has been estimated at thousands of kilograms. Even if the stream is only 1,000 kg of iron, then 2,000 kg, or two metric tonnes, of thermite would be required. But the CD hypothesis implies much more than this. For a start the thermite would have been distributed over the proposed target floor for initial collapse, so it would be very difficult for the molten iron products to pool in one place and pour out. Secondly, the CD hypothesis agrees that the floor(s) of impact of the plane could not have been exactly predicted, so every, say, 5 floors, another couple of metric tonnes of thermite would be required. (Jones: ‘… to make it appear that the planes somehow initiated the collapse; cutter-charges could have been pre-placed at numerous spots in the building, since one would not know exactly where the planes would enter.’) Even if only the top half of the building were so prepared, then we would anticipate 2 metric tonnes x 11 locations or 22 tonnes. If the mass of stream of molten metal were estimated at more like 10,000 kg of iron then the figure goes up to 220 tonnes of thermite. We have to believe (a) that the conspirators were ignorant enough to attempt to use thermite, and (b) could insinuate between 22 and 220 tonnes of thermite, plus charges, plus radio firing systems, into each tower.



If in addition, thermite is required by the CD hypothesis to account for the molten steel in the basement after collapse, then we have to add an addition two tonnes of thermite for every tonne of molten iron. The problem for the CD theory is in fact that no reliable estimates exist of the amount of molten metal, if any, in the basements.



To sum up, it is a tough job to for the CD hypothesis to account for the stream of molten metal as iron produced from thermite reaction because (a) the choice of thermite requires the conspirators to be incompetent, (b) pooling of the molten iron would require the odd concentration of thermite on a given floor in one location, and (c) the quantity needed (22-220 tonnes) would be hard to smuggle in and hide in the building. This quantity increases by two tonnes per every tonne of molten steel estimated to be in the basements.



The IF hypothesis suggests that the molten metal is aluminium (and other alloys used in plane construction), and that it pooled in that location because that is where the plane was. As Jones rightly point out however, the IF hypothesis would require the molten aluminium (and alloys) to attain temperatures several hundred degrees above melting point. The IF hypothesis also requires that the molten steel in the basement have been heated by a combination of fire and mgh energy, so much rests on estimates of those factors.



I want to add a hypothesis that may yet explain the high temperatures, and would need to be disproved by the CD theorists: that some of the aluminium in the planes was ignited on impact. I return to this issue later on.


http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm


Molten Steel thoery at ground zero address and dispelled. Next question please...

Nope. Wrong again

[agentsmith]

So it is your opinion that the official history of our planet and all the events that have happend on earth are all accurately recorded?

There are are no hidden/occult/secret/alternative histories? Because it would take too many people to cover up anything that would be on a grand scale?

I'm not sure how many conspirators it would take to cover up the events you proposed. My guess is that it would not be thousands as you say.

How many conspirators do you think it took to create a fake religion called Christiany and keep it a relative secret for 2,000 years?Fake religion? What does this have to do with crack pot 9-11 stupiditys? Or do you think your too smart to belive in God? If you are right, then laugh at me in the end you will. If I am right about God then 9-11 will be the least of your worries......C,mon Conan bust this evil plan wide open. Prove it and I will personally shoot all evil republicans and swear my allegiance to the socialist(progressive) party.:rolleyes:

[Rhandhular]

Nope. Wrong again

Once again you provide nothing to back up your allegations that I am wrong. Take the Molten Steel theory back to the drawing board Conan. lol

[Rhandhular]

Fake religion? What does this have to do with crack pot 9-11 stupiditys? Or do you think your too smart to belive in God? If you are right, then laugh at me in the end you will. If I am right about God then 9-11 will be the least of your worries......C,mon Conan bust this evil plan wide open. Prove it and I will personally shoot all evil republicans and swear my allegiance to the socialist(progressive) party.:rolleyes:

These guys never prove anything AS. It will be a long time before you are pledging allegiance to the socialist party:D

[Conan21]

Once again you provide nothing to back up your allegations that I am wrong. Take the Molten Steel theory back to the drawing board Conan. lol

Exactly what you did to my post. An ignorant comment deserves an ignorant response which is what you received.

Reasons

1. I was referring to history and religion in reference to Agent Smith's post. Stating that vast occult histories do exist. History has everything to do with
where society is heading.
2. I never even mentioned Thermite, why are you dispproving something I didn't claim? I was just asking to explain it because it shouldn't be there.
3. All that machines operators would have to do is work around the pools. :rolleyes:
4. You article tries to explain the molten pools but Nist doesn't even acknowledge them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZUHBKwYRw0

Your theory
The aluminum from the planes is what caused these pools :rolleyes:

Well how does that account for building 7's Lava pool?
Would these aluminum pools keep burning for months? The last one did not burn out untill December.

[Rhandhular]

3. All that machines operators would have to do is work around the pools. :rolleyes:


Oh I see. They could work right next to 2000 degrees pools of molten steel. That statement was the dumbest one you have made yet. Let me repost the info that discredits the molten steel theory again...

Photographs that we have examined purporting to show demolition equipment extracting "molten steel" from the debris at ground zero are inconclusive at best, and most are inaccurate as described. Extracting various hot molten compounds or debris is one thing, but "molten steel beams" is quite another. As a fundamental point, if an excavator or a grapple ever dug into a pile of molten steel heated to an excess of 2000 degrees Fahrenheit it would lose its ability to function. At a minimum the hydraulics would immediately fail and its moving parts would bond up or seize together. The heat would then quickly transfer through the steel components of the excavator and there would be concern for its operator. The photos we have reviewed on various websites do not show any of this, and if anything, indicate that the underground fires- while very hot- were not enough to melt steel.

http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE...d%208-8-06.pdf


4. You article tries to explain the molten pools but Nist doesn't even acknowledge them.

Comprehension skills keeping you down? The article comes to the conclusion that there where no pools of molten steel.


2. I never even mentioned Thermite, why are you dispproving something I didn't claim? I was just asking to explain it because it shouldn't be there.



Thermite is the substance that allegedly caused the pools of molten steel. Do you even know your own conspiracies?



Well how does that account for building 7's Lava pool?
Would these aluminum pools keep burning for months? The last one did not burn out untill December.

Or so YOU say. To bad you cannot prove that this occurred. lol

[Conan21]

I never said anything about Thermite. I'm not saying that is not what the metal is but I did not propose that to you. I just asked what caused these molten pools that were under all three piles of debris to burn for months and you went off on a false tangant. I'll use one of your lines here..."stay on topic"...

so bottom line.
We have pools of molten "lava" as described by clean up crew under all 3 buildings that was so hot they couldn't get near them. Pools that were not put out for months and this was caused by the airplanes aluminum?:confused: Also NIST doesn't even acknowledge these airplane pools.:confused:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM7HI4kjtvA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR7_9QgAb-I

Thats an interesting conspiracy theory you have there...

[Rhandhular]

I never said anything about Thermite. I'm not saying that is not what the metal is but I did not propose that to you. I just asked what caused these molten pools that were under all three piles of debris to burn for months and you went off on a false tangant. I'll use one of your lines here..."stay on topic"...

so bottom line.
We have pools of molten "lava" as described by clean up crew under all 3 buildings that was so hot they couldn't get near them. Pools that were not put out for months and this was caused by the airplanes aluminum?:confused: Also NIST doesn't even acknowledge these airplane pools.:confused:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM7HI4kjtvA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR7_9QgAb-I

Thats an interesting conspiracy theory you have there...

Again your comprehension skills are inadequate. The article states there were not pools of molten steel.
Take care and be well.:D

[Conan21]

No Pools? :rolleyes:

I guess all of those guys working on the debris talking about these "lava pools" and extreme temperatures were part of the 9/11 truth conspiracy?

P.S your link doesn't even work.

[Rhandhular]

There are dozens of facts in the articles I sent. You can also get contact information there to challenge the editor of TVNL with your brilliance. What are your credentials that you can challenge the physicists and other scholars who have debunked the official story? Of course, you're ready to support your claim.

The editor at TVNL has openly challenged anyone to debate him anywhere at anytime. Let's see if you'll do that. Yeah, right.

editor@tvnewslies.org Write to him. Post his answer. Let's see what you do.

He is apparently unwilling to debate the mighty Rhandhular though. I sent a second email to the address you provided today and I will keep you updated on whether your hero responds this time.

[kawasaki1]

He is apparently unwilling to debate the mighty Rhandhular though. I sent a second email to the address you provided today and I will keep you updated on whether your hero responds this time.

:D

[Rhandhular]

:D

Still waiting. lol

[agentsmith]

A national college famous in the field of engineering,(and I'm sorry I can't recall the name) has released their 2 year study on what brought the towers down. Answer? TWO PLANES!