Dallas Gets It Very Own 9/11 Truther Billboard on Stemmons Freeway

911Billboard.jpg
rethink911.org
You had to know that the World Trade Center attacks on September 11, 2001, would spawn a host of conspiracy theories, like the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and Pearl Harbor before it. So, we here at the Dallas Observer office weren't all that suprised to receive multiple hand-mailed letters from the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, informing us that its campaign to expose the real story behind the fall of the Twin Towers had come to the City of Hate, on a nearby stretch of Stemmons Freeway between Oak Lawn and Market Center.

It reads, "Did you know a 3rd tower fell on 9/11?" and provides a link to its website, ReThink911.org. "Trust Your Eyes, the Facts, and the Laws of Physics," a pamphlet implores readers, before attempting to dismantle the report from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which concluded that the root cause of the collapse was an "office furnishings-fueled blaze" that burned uncontrollably in the third tower, WTC 7. These fires weakened and unseated a steel girder, whose failure caused a cascade of floor failures. The report found that if the building's sprinkler system had worked (water pipes were damaged by the collapse of the twin towers) WTC 7 might still be standing.

This group, one of many such organizations, claims however that WTC 7 falls all too "uniformly through what was the path of greatest resistance." "A single, localized failure...NIST's unseated girder could not cause the systematic and total failure of 400 other structural steel connections per second."

It could, NIST reports, if WTC 7 had long, unsupported floor spans, which it did.

The group claims to have documented "unmistakable signs of a controlled demolition." NIST says the kind of explosives required to initiate column failure would register at 140 decibels at a distance of at least half a mile. No one, so far, has reported hearing such sounds. The truthers talk about thermite and microspheres -- further evidence, they say, of an explosion. An analysis of the infamous "red/gray chips" by the American Academy of Forensic Science found that they were an epoxy resin, not thermite.

Make of these guys what you will. If you're buying what they are selling, you can literally go online and buy coffee mugs, T-shirts and DVDs. The truth has a price.

My Voice Nation Help
269 comments
HowardIntegral
HowardIntegral

I'm not going to speculate on motivations re. the slant of this article, but it amounts to a denial of an objective, careful look at the evidence.  Citing superficial "refutations" or supposedly authoritative explanations for the fall of Bldg. 7 (per NIST, for example) without a careful analysis of all the data does NOT amount to responsible journalism.  It does not help toward finding out what really DID happen to bring this bldg down as well as the twin towers... if nothing else, in order to create new and better safety standards for high-rises! (Don't people care that apparently many steel-frame skyscrapers are vulnerable, if the official account is correct?) 

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/08/22/confessions-of-a-911-truth-activist-2/

Steve Fahrney, AE9/11 Truth member who discovered that the main tests were never done for explosives other than nanothermite.

"I had always assumed that the tests had been done but had yielded no results, which I further assumed was the reason the painstaking nano-thermite research, testing, and publication were carried out. I did not find out until I had been on Richard Gage’s staff for nine months, via an e-mail thread, that we had never tested for explosives ourselves. I was alarmed by this revelation and quickly backed the notion of testing as soon as possible. I was even more surprised when a respected team member, Gregg Roberts, a technical writer who co-authored the nano-thermite paper, was arguing adamantly AGAINST testing for conventional explosives and det cord. He argued that we have limited resources, and we already have a 'smoking gun' and saw no benefit of testing. He cautioned that since so much time had passed the residues might have broken down, where testing could yield a negative result even if they had been used. He further emphasized that “debunkers” would use a negative result to their advantage."

Roberts may well believe what he said, but Jones' deliberately avoiding the nuke elements in the USGS studies, saying he actually covered the USGS studies (yes, but only for nanothermitic results, or ones which could be pushed in that direction), since Jones is himself a nukes expert, indicates likely that this is where his avuncular (uncle-like) mode is useful as a disinfo plant.

Even if not, his rebuttals to nukes do not rebut and AE9/11T has never tested for anything other than thermite itself and items which could or could not be from thermite.

Also, thermite is not even as explosive as dynamite and even with "enhancement to make it so" (there are problems with this, but I'll let that be right now), thermite glows and fizzles. Was it used? Likely. NOT for the main takedown, which included massive explosions, cookie-cutter holes in other buildings, nuke elements as byproducts ignored by Jones in the USGS study, half of another building (building 4 missing), all of WTC 6's centre, most of the Deutsche Bank building, cars with neutron effects but no blackening worth speaking of, several linked corner spire pieces, linked to a 60-storey spire, not merely falling over, but getting converted to dust while falling, being blown off, after it was missed by the main charges. Shaking off a bit of asbestos? No; they wibble-wobble into dust - the top actually falling a bit while being turned into a column of dust. 

Just FYI to all.

Good luck. The truth is complex.

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

The boxboy comment from alburyt is moot.

THE STEEL COLUMNS TAPERED. The top sections represented 1/4 of the steel strength. There is no way that could overwhelm the bottom sections AND at freefall. So you may wish to watch, instead: 13:30 forward here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ

Whether you like the people on one side or another, this talk demolishes Steve Jones' comments here http://911blogger.com/news/2012-09-30/mini-nukes-wtc-one-more-time : he ignores the nuke elements and focusses on explosive/thermitic elements ONLY, here.

evan131
evan131

Typical arrogant scribblers pretending their grasp of physics is better than that of the 2057 Architects and Engineers -including the original lead electrical engineer for the WTC- who design such buildings for a living. 

Any idiot can easily learn that bringing down any building -let alone 1400' WTC towers and the 741' WTC 7 in the level, symmetrical fashion witnessed requires thousands of precisely-place and -tiimed charges. Low temperature office fires could burn forever without bending a single piece of steel, let alone bring down an entire steel building in symmetrical, level fashion.

In Europe, where science education is better, far more people are aware that the govt story is a pack of ever-changing lies. Even "journalists" can understand all of this easily, IF they want. But there's only one law left in 'Murka: "Kiss up and shit down." This newspaper is shitting on the truth and those who risk their lives to bring it to the people, in order to kiss up to the world masters.

harlanishard
harlanishard

Considering that the worst acts of criminal mass murder in American history were not immediately - or ever - followed by a criminal investigation with subpoena power, I'd say that an investigation into the 9/11 attacks is not only warranted but a dozen years overdue.  The media likes to belittle those who question the attacks and even to distort the record in a biased way, as this article does, but the fact is that the government's version of events is so full of holes and unsupported that it would never hold up in a court of law.  This is precisely why the government has jury-rigged the whole process, while it has subverted the Constitution.  The Bush WH suppressed every effort to criminally investigate the attacks.  It pressured Senator Daschle not to mount a Congressional investigation into the attacks.  (Daschle, along with Leahy, who was Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, both had packets of weaponized anthrax sent to their offices.  This substance was genetically and morphologically traced to a US Army weapons laboratory in Ft. Detrick, MD.  Only individuals with high level clearances could have accessed this weapons grade anthrax.  The message was clear - the Praetorian Guard was holding knives to the Senate's throats.  In the last days of the Bush Administration, the FBI announced that it had finally found the culprit, alas, he had already "committed suicide". ) 

Since 9/11 there has been a systematic destruction of the rule of law by the US Government - not just the Executive Branch, but Congress itself, enacting blatantly unconstitutional legislation.  All are designed to cloak what really happened on 9/11 in total secrecy and to blast away protections for all Americans formerly guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.  For a dozen years the government and the obsequious media have pounded the official doctrine of 9/11 into our heads, yet there is a huge portion of the population, including many professional architects, engineers, materials scientists, intelligence experts, police investigators and real investigative journalists who have spoken out that what you've been told is utter pernicious nonsense!

Most recently, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist, Sy Hersh, has reported that the government's story of the assassination of bin Laden is totally fabricated.  None of it would surprise anyone who has actually taken the time to do the research and read many of the outstanding investigative volumes into 9/11 and the so-called War on Terror which have been published over the years.  For example, one of the most well-researched volumes published a decade ago - which has never been refuted - is Michael C. Ruppert's "Crossing The Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil".  At 600 pages with over 1,000 corroborated references from unimpeachible sources, the book should make any of the so-called journalists who have been regurgitating government propaganda for years question their own credentials - but they won't, because they have no conscience.

lessa
lessa

Wow, people who are new to this, notice that the trolls against ae911truth no longer attempt to debunk the demolition evidence with references to the stupids at JREF or other "debunking" sites. These people are so desperate that they are instead posing as truthers with fake theories about mini nukes and judy wood directed energy non sense. Do not confuse these people with real truthers, and do not feed the trolls by arguing with them. Look up ae911truth and look at the real evidence for yourself. Over 2000 experts have signed the petition now, take a look a the list, Bowman, Dwain Deets NASA director, and more experts.

dallasobserver.20.xy
dallasobserver.20.xy

A new book on 9/11 is out.

Dimitri Khalezov has spent 10 years researching and writing a book on what happened during 9/11.  The book is now available on the internet.  Download links::
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0pdmokX9s8

Or read at:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/170266922/9-11thology-The-third-truth-about-9-11-or-Defending-the-US-Government-which-has-only-the-first-two

In a 2010 interview,  Khalezov explained that you can't build a skyscraper in NYC without an approved demolition plan.  On 9/11, the WTC's demolition plan was put into action to demolish the complex.

Khalezov learned of this demolition plan from his job in the Soviet Union.  He had worked in the nuclear intelligence unit and under an agreement between the Soviet Union and the USA, each country was obliged to inform the other of peaceful uses of nuclear explosions.   The WTC was constructed with 3 thermo-nuclear devices deep in its foundations.

Note: underground nuclear explosions do not produce mushroom clouds.  This is only ever seen when the explosion takes place above ground.  On 9/11, the explosions were deep underground.

More info (with links to 2010 interview):
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_911_154.htm
Video # 4 - WTC's demolition plan
Video # 14 - WTC 7 (which fell ½ hour AFTER the BBC announced its collapse).
Videos # 25/26 - chronic radiation sickness of WTC responders

Khalezov was interviewed on 4 Sept 2013:
http://www.renseradioarchives.com/harris/


kpre
kpre

FInally! A a place to buy reasonably t-shirts and coffee mugs that espouse dumbass conspiracy theories I learned from spending too much time on youtube. My co-workers will be so happy when we're alone in the lunch room together and they have to listen to me blather for 25 minutes about thermite and the Illuminati.


tonyq15
tonyq15

( I'm a Canadian - many (29) Canadians died on 9/.11.

There was no investigation of their deaths.....(as per-usual)

(Iit looks like 9/11 was an inside job.)


tonyq15
tonyq15

So " Brantley" 

Inside Job ?

cincy911truthguy
cincy911truthguy

Another braindead so-called "journalist" named Brantley Hargrove makes a feeble attempt at continuing the cover up of nearly 3,000 people on 9/11.

Consider these facts... Could Al Qaeda:

Get the Pentagon and NORAD to standdown for almost two hours on the morning on 9/11?

Place two U.S. aircraft carriers off the coast of Pakistan just prior to 9/11?

Place explosives in the WTC towers and Building 7 (with tenants like the Secret Service, CIA, SEC, DoD etc?

Put Afghanistan invasion plans on Bush's desk two days before 9/11?

Get top Pentagon officials to cancel travel plans for the morning of 9/11 (See Newsweek article.)

Plan for the U.S. military to have military war games on 9/11 simulating planes crashing into buildings, going in and out of radar and drawing all but four fighter jets away for the Northeast air sector?

Place false blips (injects) on the screens of air traffic controllers on 9/11?

Take the main NORAD (NEADS) radar unit that covers the Northeast U.S. offline for maintenance on the morning of 9/11?

Place Bush and Condoleeza Rice crony Phillip Zelikow as the executive director of the 9/11 Commission?

Get Bush to sit silently in the school classroom for almost a half an hour after being told "The second tower has been struck. America is under attack"?

Get Bush and Cheney to only agree to speak to the 9/11 Commission together as long as no audio/video recordings or notes were taken?

Get the mainstream U.S. media to completely fail to question the 9/11 story and not investigate any of the lies and anomalies. Then cover up all of the damning evidence that has come out since 9/11?

The "official 9/11 story" is a complete farce. Please visit www.PatriotsQuestion911.com and www.AE911Truth.org.

Check out these two documentary films be Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. (Contrary to the snide remarks of Mr. Hargrove you can watch these videos for free on Youtube.)

9/11:Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg

9/11: Blueprint for Truth...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vb7o-OOe20

grandmacaesar
grandmacaesar

WTC7 was a 47 story building.  It was over a hundred yards from the twin towers.  At 5:20 on 9/11/01, it fell STRAIGHT DOWN into it's own footprint in under 7 seconds.  There is no way in the real world---the world we live in---that this could've happened without cutter charges.

It wasn't mentioned in the 9/11 Comission Report.  And other than a brief late Saturday night "expose" by Geraldo, this hasn't been mentioned by "our" media.  

If you've never seen it, watch a few vids on Youtube.  Then ask yourself why neither the media nor our government has informed we the people.

 I'll be blunt: If you can look at the "collapse" of WTC7, and you think it was caused by fire (as our government claims), you are an idiot.

This is not the only lingering question regarding that day.  There are many more.  For instance, we have never been shown a picture or a video of 110 pancaked floors (should be two piles).  The twin towers "collapsed" into two piles no more than three stories tall.  The towers and everything in them literally, quite literally, turned to dust. 

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@HowardIntegral "Many steel-framed skyscrapers" don't have bar joists weighing ~24#/ft and spanning 60+ feet, or ~52' W24 X 55 beams, ~47' girders, asymmetry, simple 4-bolt gravity connections, and shattered water mains to sprinklers and fire hoses.

Since you insist on drinking the Kool-Aid and enjoy libeling countless people with nonsense, ask Box Boy* and his "experts" to demonstrate for you on video with audio how explosives or incendiaries secretly cut the 4.91" flanges, 3.07" webs, and 215 sq in cross sections of W14 X 730 columns like the 11 of 24 in WTC 7's core, and the 4 corner columns in each tower's core:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ochshorndesign.com/cornell/writings/milstein-critique/images/8-fig04.png&imgrefurl=http://www.ochshorndesign.com/cornell/writings/milstein-critique/sustainability8.html&h=478&w=638&sz=404&tbnid=q-S41Ix2mT4HeM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=122&zoom=1&usg=__UlCatIoHNuaIBUbQaF2PuEchSxU=&docid=adi9gO1tvsGG9M&sa=X&ei=FIbgUaLxFOr54APlsYHABA&ved=0CDUQ9QEwAw&dur=135
If they ever HAD TO do it, this "debate" would be OVER.

*Box Boy's ONLY 9/11 "research":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFVoencqfZw

lessa
lessa

@clarekuehn the dust was too corrosive to test for conventional explosives because the evidence would have been long gone. Jones did not mention evidence for mini nukes because he found none. He and many others did however document evidence for thermate and and nanothermite. If you want to continue with your mini nuke or Judy Wood DEW nonsense, get some papers published like Jones did, if you are such an expert. What´s that? You cant publish? Too bad. End of story. Good bye!

lessa
lessa

@clarekuehnI repeat the general gist of my response to you about your debunked long ago Judy Wood BS, learn to read papers. The "one more time" in Steven J´s response refers to the fact that it is in addition to another paper he wrote, which you have obviously not read, or more likely dont care about because you are a disinfo agent. Jones had addressed and refuted your blabbering about certain elements found in the dust http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Hard-Evidence-Rebudiates-the-Hypothesis-that-Mini-Nukes-were-used-on-the-wtc-towers-by-steven-jones.pdf

Tanya63
Tanya63

@harlanishard Seriously, you're going to use Seymour Hersh to support your claims?  Hersh is a discredited "journalist" who has been caught using forged documents, using hearsay as "proof," and outright lying.  For example, he tells a story about JFK that involves a woman, Florence Kater, having a photograph of him "sneaking out" of a paramour's home.  He says that Kater was ignored by JFK but that a photo of her with her photo of JFK was printed in the Washington Star the next day.  It turned out that Kater died long before he made the claim, and that no photo of her nor mention of her name was ever used in any Washington newspaper.  He also made claims that he based on documents that turned out to be forgeries.  Hersh knew they were forgeries but made the allegations anyway.

If you want anyone to take your wild claims seriously, get a better source.



lessa
lessa

@jmtalboo Grossly misinformed dishonesty like pretending Millette represents AAFS, and forgetting to tell readers that this guy has been charged with fraud for his previous papers on dust from GZ. The 140 db claim is another old long debunked tale, NIST hid all the recorded evidence for explosions and thermite materials are also a lot quieter than conventional explosives.

lessa
lessa

the real truther movement addressed and debunked all the claims about mini nukes and dew weapons long ago, so do not confuse the judy wood supporters and the mini nuke claims with the real truther groups. they were expelled from the truther movement and have nothing to do with the truther movement. a few of them continue to pester blogs but mostly these are people defending the official story posing as truthers to discredit ae911. http://911blogger.com/news/2012-09-30/mini-nukes-wtc-one-more-time

harlanishard
harlanishard

@dallasobserver.20.xy If you believe that underground explosions took place on 9/11, where is the seismic data that sustains your theory?  Sorry.  It's not there.

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@dallasobserver.20.xy Since both WTC tower collapses started at the plane impact levels and worked downward, those extra quiet subterranean explosives were really quite amazing.

Your Russian crackpot is seriously fos about demolitions planned during the construction phase of a hi-rise, and seems a little short on motive too. Are ~30 year-old, ~95% occupied Manhattan hi-rises worth BILLIONS usually demolished secretly for no apparent reason?

Reynolds Wrap isn't just for baking cookies yanno...

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

@kpre Well, since your friends are likely only partly informed, this makes sense; or, are you discounting understanding of things? Ah, possibly. How about this, kpre: that there is not "an Illuminati" but it is a catch-all term for different corruption ideologues, and some elitists and gang-like secretive think tank types (read a 19th century novel or history to know of those who sat around at the Athenaeum Club in London, planning dissolution of South Africa, etc.), and actual secretive and even death-adoring cults (yes, they do exist).

And how about this: the pieces of thermitic materials were tested and sparked, so they're not epoxy resin. However, AE911T is a limited hangout for position on the science of 9/11 events: the top spokespeople never tested for OTHER explosives, AND in fact the observable events of the day and after, and the USGS studies find nuclear results.

USGS list was given in my other posts. Scroll down for info.

Multiple and high nuke byproducts of FISSION bombs -- which work differently than you think, and yes, can be small and leave (proportionally) very little radiation even a few days later -- were found in the USGS studies of dust all around the region of WTC complex and further away.

The USA Military has declassified http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/rdd-7.html  the fact they use nukes (details not given) in demolitions. And yes, suitcase bombs (not literal, but a nickname for small bombs in large backpacks, etc.) are well attested by USA and Russia for years.

Now the dustification, the immediate cleanup (before even helping people there were trucks already sweeping streets), the constant trucking in of dirt, wetting it down, and carrying it off, and keeping the area moist for YEARS make sense. (Fission bombs do not leave MUCH radiation, but it would still be high enough for those working there.)

So, now you have something to blather about back.

tonyq15
tonyq15

Where's the tea party on this ?

( Oh right - Don't mention  "urban Moving Systems")

They are all nice Israeli  boys...just ask Dianne Feinstein

and her husband - (now taking over some cheap postal real estate now apparently -

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@tonyq15 Your crackpot's "one small focus jet" is coming from a corner of the North Tower, and the towers' corners weren't load-bearing. The fact that he's marveling over the free fall of airborne columns and other debris speaks for itself. Jeezus; what a jackass...

tonyq15
tonyq15

(As a Canadian friend - To the best of all of my decades of  knowledge - 9/11 was an inside job. (When's 'Texas' going to deal with 'gravity' and resistance' ?) (Let alone the boys from 'Urban Moving Systems'?)

tonyq15
tonyq15

(The RCMP usually investigates any foreign deaths of Canadians) (Apparently not if it was 9/11)

tonyq15
tonyq15

And the USA  has been rather  (well ok put comment here)

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@grandmacaesar Nice straw man. NO damaged or destroyed NYC building except the 2 targeted by al Qaeda were mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report; it simply wasn't in the scope of THAT investigation, as you'd know if you even looked at the contents page of the report.

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@grandmacaesar

Ask Box Boy* and his "experts" to demonstrate for you on video with audio how explosives or incendiaries secretly cut the 4.91" flanges, 3.07" webs, and 215 sq in cross sections of W14 X 730 columns like the 11 of 24 in WTC 7's core, and the 4 corner columns in each tower's core:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ochshorndesign.com/cornell/writings/milstein-critique/images/8-fig04.png&imgrefurl=http://www.ochshorndesign.com/cornell/writings/milstein-critique/sustainability8.html&h=478&w=638&sz=404&tbnid=q-S41Ix2mT4HeM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=122&zoom=1&usg=__UlCatIoHNuaIBUbQaF2PuEchSxU=&docid=adi9gO1tvsGG9M&sa=X&ei=FIbgUaLxFOr54APlsYHABA&ved=0CDUQ9QEwAw&dur=135
If they ever HAD TO do it, this "debate" would be OVER.

*Box Boy's ONLY 9/11 "research":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFVoencqfZw

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

@lessa @clarekuehn Anger and silliness aside, you are patently simply WRONG. Read the USGS studied. Jones IGNORED the nuke BYPRODUCTS evidence. He does not ADDRESS it but it is THERE.

As to Wood, I am not even talking of her work except that yes, the spire is very odd, and yes, she was the first to point out (pointedly) some of the problems with positing only regular explosives profiles -- including blazingly bright and sizzling nanothermite (not seen all over like a limelight).

"Too bad." Beginning of story.

lessa
lessa

@clarekuehn And again people, this is why the mini -nuke and Judy Wood people had to be expelled from the truther movement, they are posers trying to discredit the the real truther movement such as ae911truth. Just ignore them, but check out the papers for yourself at journal of 9/11 studies and ae911truth. The links to papers are not for "clare" she won´t read or understand them anyway.

harlanishard
harlanishard

@lessa You cannot get around the fact that the seismic data discounts the claims of mini nukes or even controlled demolition.  I could care less that AE911 has purged Dr. Wood.  Her theory that classified directed energy weapons were used to destroy the towers is at least supported by the quantifiable data and observation available from the undisputed record of that day.

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@clarekuehn @kpre The "immediate cleanup" took NEARLY EIGHT MONTHS, and many SEAoNY, PANYNJ, FEMA BPAT, NSF, and other structural engineers were on site every day. Why, pray tell, wouldn't the streets have been swept immediately?

ClKuehn
ClKuehn

@alburyt @tonyq15 You are so behind the facts you really do need to catch up. Of course all points carry some load, but no, the corners aren't load-bearing. The items you will see on Youtube, etc., often make some mistakes; they also will show some things you need to know. Stop your "guffawing" enough to become a careful jury member, so to speak, and learn what is valid and invalid in the evidence points and arguments presented. That is what cross-examination is for -- and in this case, the cross examination you raise is missing the main point but technically correct. Kudos. Now advance in the points which are valid. -- Ad Hominem/ Strawman fallacies. Seeing trees for forest. Whatever you want to use to grow in understanding your error here, do. You overfocus on error. These buildings in many ways are blowing apart and disintegrating, and USGS found remnants of multiple high nuke byproducts in the dust, and now more people publicly know of the kind of nuke which would do this particular result: small fission bombs, combined with explosives.

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

@alburyt @grandmacaesar Those mocking Gage's point are mocking their own level of understanding. It is fine to use a simple demonstration to get people out of their own assumptions that something could work at all. The way the official story puts it requires this kind of basic assumption, which is patently wrong. An engineer is demonstrating the first basic concept (a grade 4 concept) so as to show that in NO way can the official story work. -- AFTER that, you will be ready for more. The top floors *have to have fallen through space with no resistance* (free fall). This is what it means. -------- It leaves out the explosions and the nuke byproducts, but it's the first point to understand.

lessa
lessa

@harlanishard @lessaThe seismic data confirms explosives, and there at least 2 papers on this subject at journal of 9/11 studies, including this one http://www.journalof911studies.com/resources/RousseauVol34November2012.pdf

Judy Wood on the other hand has nothing but lunatic claims that all the WTC steel disappeared despite testimony and photo and video evidence of all the steel being there. But like you she  does not distinguish between voices in her head and published papers, photo evidence, etc, and this is why she had to be expelled from the truther movement, and this is why there is no point arguing with people like you. 

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

@lessa @clarekuehn

I understand your impressions and it's fine to cite something. IT TURNS OUT TO BE A SUPERFICIAL treatment. And wrong in this case.

The irony is that the dust samples the Jones followers tout actually show that theory theory is indefensible. They LEAVE OUT the nuke byproduct elements, telling you only that they found the other remnants of explosives! So yes, Jones found the others stuff. So what? He's lying about what ELSE was there with a sleight-of-hand link.

I don't like Jones or Prager but I know their work. So let's handle your comment, despite its attitude to mine.

Jones says, "Furthermore, the USGS samples held residues which were indeed indicative of energetic compounds as obtained by FOIA action by myself and James Gourley; which we discuss in this paper:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf"

Well, the only items they discuss IN the USGS samples are (also in the A&E911 documentary, "Explosive Evidence"), they mention USGS, but the only content of the dust samples they cite is the tiny chips and iron spheres.  There is much more.

The man Jones tries to slag here is Prager. Not a friend of mine by any stretch of the imagination, but his work is good.

Here is a summary:

Jeff Prager, founder of an award winning magazine for Senior Citizens, in 2002 he tried to prove 19 Muslims hijacked four

planes and attacked us. By 2005, he realized this was false, sold his business, left the US and began to investigate 9/11

full-time.  (See his 9/11 America Nuked.) In “Proof of Ternary Fission in New York City on 9/11″ he observes (1) that dust

samples are the best evidence of what happened on 9/11; (2) that the USGS samples taken over a dozen locations show how

various elements interacted prove that fission reaction(s) had taken place; (3) that Multiple Myeloma in the general

population at a rate of 3-9 incidents per 100,000 people, but the rate was 18 per 100,000 among first responders; (4) that

other cancers relatively unusual cancers have appeared among the responders, including non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia,

thyroid, pancreatic, brain, prostate, esophageal and blood and plasma cancers; and (5) that, as of March 2011 no less than

1,003 first responders died from various cancers.  The elements that have been found in these dust samples provide an

astoinshing array of proof of nukes:


Barium and Strontium: Neither of these elements should ever appear in building debris in these quantities. The levels

never fall below 400ppm for Barium and they never drop below 700ppm for Strontium and reach over 3000ppm for both in the

dust sample taken at Broadway and John Streets.


Thorium and Uranium: These elements only exist in radioactive form. Thorium is a radioactive element formed from Uranium

by decay. It’s very rare and should not be present in building rubble, ever. So once again we have verifiable evidence

that a nuclear fission event has taken place.


Lithium: With the presence of lithium we have compelling evidence that this fission pathway of Uranium to Thorium and

Helium, with subsequent decay of the Helium into Lithium has taken place.


Lanthanum: Lanthanum is the next element in the disintegration pathway of the element Barium.


Yttrium: The next decay element after Strontium, which further confirms the presence of Barium.


Chromium: The presence of Chromium is one more “tell tale” signature of a nuclear detonation.


Tritium: A very rare element and should not be found at concentrations 55 times normal the basement of WTC-6 no less than

11 days after 9/11, which is another “tell tale” sign of nukes.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/12/911-truth-will-out-the-vancouver-hearings-ii

For a verbal rebuttal hear the first 30 mins of part 2 of this presentation just put up -- from people you may or may not

like, but there IS a rebuttal to all this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAEvw2CjAYQ

ClKuehn
ClKuehn

@alburyt @clarekuehn @kpre Look, you're missing the point. You want to talk how LONG it took or when it started in combo with what would be required for nukes? On its own, a fast cleanup start for dust could be anything (except normal, to have all the trucks ready when people weren't even out searching for bodies, thus already indicating a readiness, an inside portion of the inside-outside falseflag job the events were). It would, however, be required for nukes. Think this through.


So it is insufficient but requisite evidence of nukes. The direct evidence is the USGS studies (fission byproducts in high and multiple quantities), combined with the results: the miles of fine dustification rather than concrete chunking and quick dissipation of a brief dark clous of fine dust (from regular explosives), and the condition of the beams, which I am not going to go into here. -- This is not a Dimitri Khalezov regular nuke in the basements; it is a series of small nukes plus explosives, and maybe one in the basements too. They do not function the way you think: they are fission (far less radiation) and there are a number of factors you would not know of, which account for strange but seemingly "not" nuclear things on the day, but which are also not accounted for without them.

Now look into it all properly.

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@ClKuehn @alburyt @tonyq15 Yeah whatever. The USGS found no such thing, nor did any of the Local 40 & 361 ironworkers, the FDNY, SEAoNY, FEMA BPAT, NSF, PANYNJ, and other SEs on the site, or any of the other ~40,000 people who worked at GZ at various times during nearly 8 months of cleanup, so your imaginary nukes didn't have much of an effect on the steel.

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

@grandmacaesar @alburyt Alburyt, you are all buried. (Ha.) You say of course they didn't cover anything else -- but it sure WOULD be convenient to leave out WTC7, wouldn't it, for impressions of people who read only one thing and assume nothing big goes down in their country as a lie like this. And the "coherent narrative" of reverse engineering what happened (it was complex) took time. You are raising an irrelevant objection. Now deal with the freefall, and the nuke byproducts and how your assumptions don't work physically re. WTC 1&2 for a) normal events from fire, and b) normal events for explosives demolitions.

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@grandmacaesar @alburyt You made a very simple-minded argument re the 9/11 Commission (made up of lawyers and politicians, not SEs, scientists, etc.) and collateral building damage from the AQ suicide attacks of 9/11. The evil US gubmint isn't keeping it a secret. The other big truther nut claim is that the news was released to the BBC (and others) BEFORE it happened, so your 9/11 "truth movement" even contradicts itself. Secret C/Ds in Manhattan are IMPOSSIBLE, but you can't even come up with a plausible and coherent motive.

Pathetic.

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

@alburyt @clarekuehn In Part 1 of "Explosive Evidence" (AE911T documentary on DVD), they discuss why they came to the timing conclusions for WTC 7.

But even if it were a few seconds longer, u miss the point: it was a steel bunker, stone cold steel (officially) for most of it, and all of it goes neatly down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yswMOB8_IAM

This is the condensed version of the doc. I think it's in there, too, about the decisions from Structural Engineers and Architects re timing of WTC7.

clarekuehn
clarekuehn

@alburyt @clarekuehn No, the first thing to understand is that FOR 1&2:

THERE WAS STONE-COLD STEEL AND STEEL FLOORPANS ALL THE WAY DOWN ENCASED IN CONCRETE and NONE OF THAT ENDED UP IN A PANCAKE 12% of the height, with trapped people, etc.

THERE WAS FREEFALL BLOWOUT SPEED. THIS TAKES NO RESISTANCE.

THE COLUMNS TAPERED; GRAVITY COLLAPSE OR FIRE-GRAVITY COLLAPSE MEANS WEIGHT FROM TOP PUSHES THE REST DOWN.

THERE IS NO BUMP TIME! BUMPING FLOORS EVERY TIME! Use simple images to get the main point. Then convert to the tech terms.

For WTC 7, you are standing on formality: of course the bottom sections are not seen so what to do? Calculate based on the top sections.

And oops: the top sections fall TOGETHER, so it is the bottom sections which are going. And diesel fuel burns at a low temperature, and the building does not sag, or tip.

Dear me, Alburyt. For all your seeming sophistication and outrage, you can only consider one idea at a time.

alburyt
alburyt topcommenter

@clarekuehn The first point to understand is that you and Box Boy aren't SEs, and no real one takes you seriously. The second point is that your 9/11 "truth movement" is lying about the collapse times for the WTC towers as well as for WTC 7. The third is that cause divining building collapses even using honest times is just plain stupid.

Regarding the simple matter of timing them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLShZOvxVe4

The EXTERIOR of WTC 7 took ~8.5 seconds to fall, and is impossible to time to the nearest 1/10 second:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnLcUxV1dPo

The bottom floors of WTC 7 aren't visible in any of the available videos, so how did your crackpots get 6.5 or 6.6 seconds for the entire 610'?

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...