The Landmark Tower: A Study in Controlled Demolition

[Taxloss]

The Landmark Tower is a 30-storey tower in downtown Fort Worth, Texas. This time tomorrow, it won't be there, because it is being demolished.

It is, in fact, one of the tallest buildings ever to be destroyed in this manner - by explosives, rather than by deconstruction. Demo teams have been working since November to prepare it for the end - around the clock in the past few days.

Here's a photo of what the interior looks like now:



The explosives aren't just in the basement. As this simulation shows, in the first seven seconds explosions have to be set off all the way up and down the tower. That's why it took the demo teams so long to strip down and prep the building. It's a vast and complicated operation - but that's what it takes to get a structure this big to fall "just right".

In planning and execution, this is a virtuoso piece of engineering.

All of which raises the question - still believe the Twin Towers, two buildings more than three times as tall as the Landmark, could be prepped for destruction by controlled demolition without anyone noticing? That in dozens of miles of film, the rippling of explosions and their blast-waves could not be seen - other than a couple of grainy stills? Not one window blew out?

The WTC was NOT destroyed by controlled demolition.

[maddiejoan]

1. IF you're right --

Then why does the haphazard collision of a jet plane bring down a skyscraper "just right"

Your link actually solidifies my notion that it was a controlled demolition.

[Taxloss]

3. The course of the planes suggests that

they wanted to knock over the towers onto Wall Street.

They reckoned without the WTC's unique design.

[maddiejoan]

5. really? According to Bin Laden's alleged videotape --

They didn't even expect the buildings to fall.

So how do you figure they wanted to "knock over the towers onto Wall Street?

As far as the WTC's unique design goes --explain to me why the core wasn't still standing.

[Taxloss]

11. I just said that the course suggested that.

And suddenly the Bin Laden tapes aren't faked? I thought it was an article of faith that OBL was a stooge.

The core was clearly destroyed by the upper storeys crashing down.

[Kevin Fenton]

43. Wall Street, core

In no particular order:
The South Tower could (theoretically) have gotten near Wall Street as it fell (but didn't in actual fact). The North Tower couldn't, because it was too far away.

The Bin Laden "confession" tape was made by one of his (several) doubles. What does this have to do with anything?

If the core was destroyed by the upper stories crashing down, then what's this?

The resemblence to the lower half of the South Tower's core is amazing. And it doesn't appear to have been destroyed by the 50+ stories that hit it, although videos show that it starts to go right after this photo was taken.

[seatnineb]

157. The WTC's unique design......which included a sprinkler system........

A sprinkler system that the official storey tells us was destroyed.

In each case, the force of the speeding plane knocked out a number of vertical columns around the building perimeter, damaged large sections of floor, sent furniture and plane wreckage flying through the offices and presumably damaged support columns in each building's core. Most likely, the initial impact also destroyed the sprinkler system on those floors
http://people.howstuffworks.com/wtc7.htm

Too bad fuckin bullshit like the above is easily disproved by the testimony of people inside the building.......

His first phone call to me was before 9 o'clock. I had just heard on the radio about the plane when the phone rang. ``Are you okay?'' I asked. ``No, call 911. We can't breathe. The rooms are filling up with smoke, and the sprinkler sysems have gone off.''

He told me they're knee deep in water and there's black smoke -- they can hardly see and they're having difficulty breathing. ``Call 911,'' he told me. Then he hung up.
http://www.mishalov.com/wtc_northtower.html

Keep believin' the bullshit Taxloss...........

[theoldman]

6. The twin towers went down from the weight of the upper structure

above the levels where the airplanes hit. If the airplanes would have hit higher up, the towers would not have collapsed.

[maddiejoan]

7. Why did Building #7 fall?

Why did the core in buildings 1 and 2 collapse?

[MrSammo1]

16. The twin towers went down from the weight of the upper structure

there was plenty of potential energy in the lower floors to absorb the weight of the upper floors. We're not taking about dominoes here. That steel had a load capacity of five times what it was lifting.

You can't get more energy out......than you put in!

Add the speed of the collapses ......we have a bold faced lie!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6545313046180631815

[Kevin Fenton]

45. I doubt it

The planes hit quite near the top:
The central impact floor in the North Tower was 95 (out of 110).
The central impact floor in the South Tower was 81 (again out of 110).
In any case, it makes no difference how far up they hit, because each building's 283 columns were tapered to take the weight of the floors above into account.

The planes took away about 14% (North Tower) and 15.5% (South Tower) of the buildings' gravity load-bearing capacity and the safety factor was at least three. What happened to the rest of the building's load carrying capacity? The planes' tanks were more than half empty when they hit and about a third of the jet fuel was used up in the initial fireballs, the rest burning up in about 10 minutes. Are you suggesting 2 buildings with safety factors of over 2.5 were destroyed by office fires lasting 56 and 102 minutes?

[Twist_U_Up]

132. Really,then why did WTC 7 fall ?

[Warpy]

10. Then who did it and when?

How come that raging, super hot fire in the building didn't detonate the explosives immediately?

How come (if you subscribe to the loony pre-placed explosives theory)the explosives didn't deteriorate in the 30 years since that particular floor was built? How did they know EXACTLY WHERE those planes would hit, 30 years later? How did the wiring between the columns survive a multifloor blast? Since the explosives have to be placed INSIDE the columns and blast shielding around the columns to concentrate the force of the blast within the columns, how was this accomplished architecturally and structurally?

If it's the "they pulled the building that day" theory, how come nobody saw an explosives team placing the explosives and how come such a superhuman team wasn't incinerated by fire? How did they do months' worth of work within half an hour in the middle of an inferno?

Honestly, the LIHOP theory that Team Stupid knew it was coming, skedaddled out of town and just let it all play out is horrific enough for any conspiracy theorist. There is no earthly reason to descend into the lunacy of the "they pulled all those buildings" crowd.

[MrSammo1]

18. How come that raging, super hot fire in the building didn't detonate the e

there is evidence that some explosives went off as the last jet hit the South Tower.

And there's no shortage of people hearing explosives going off during the fires.

As for putting in the explosives.......that's easy if you have an "in." No real rush seeing that this was preplanned in advance. Moving men, special maintenance teams there to fix "whatever!" The average person isn't even aware of what's going on around them. Pretty simple!

Plus there's the physical facts that explosives were in fact used. The speed of the collapses. building seven. The missing Pentagon and Shanksville jets. The ever changing Osama Bin Laden.

[Warpy]

19. OK, once more, slowly

"there is evidence that some explosives went off as the last jet hit the South Tower." No, there is NO evidence of that. What you saw was the flash fire from hundreds of pounds of exploded jet fuel. Plus, if, as you state, the kind of explosives that cause a controlled demolition had gone off THEN, that is when the building would have come down, not many minutes later.

"and there's no shortage of people hearing explosives going off during the fires. " Well, people were hearing a lot of things: the beginning of building failure, falling debris, falling bodies, exploding aerosols if they were close enough. They were NOT hearing explosions. That's been proven pretty conclusively by analysis of audio tapes at the scene.

"As for putting in the explosives.......that's easy if you have an "in." No real rush seeing that this was preplanned in advance. Moving men, special maintenance teams there to fix "whatever!" The average person isn't even aware of what's going on around them. Pretty simple!" Let's get this straight, you claim that people came in and did MONTHS of work, EXACTLY where a plane was going to hit IN THE FUTURE without having cleaning people, security crews, and late office workers (and those brokerages had people watching the Nikkei all night) seeing them? They truly MUST be gods!

"Plus there's the physical facts that explosives were in fact used. The speed of the collapses. building seven. The missing Pentagon and Shanksville jets. The ever changing Osama Bin Laden." Those jets went missing only in the minds of conspiracy types. Check out the forensics the FAA has done on the parts. Oh, I forgot, the gummint lies about EVERYTHING and only conspiracists know the WHOLE TRUTH. There are NO physical facts that explosives were used, no traces of materials, no explosions on the video (unless you really don't know what you're looking at as the building failed), and yes, the gummint has probably been making its own OBL tapes. Arabic lip readers have had a field day with some of those.

Honestly, LIHOP should be enough for anybody.

[MrSammo1]

36. You'ver got a lot of researching to do.........

physicists aren't fooled as easily as the rest of the American sheeple.

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/

You can't change the laws of nature.......not today, not tomorrow, and not on Sept 11, 2001!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6545313046180631815

[Warpy]

39. I'd suggest a line of research that doesn't involve

people who either were not at the scene or who are completely out of their fields, but I know that wouldn't support the conspiracy theory, so oh well.

I'd suggest you do a web search and find out about what it really takes to do a controlled demolition and get back to me, but I know that's useless.

How very telling that none of my points was answered.

[MrSammo1]

71. There is no shortage..........

of physical proof. That's all that's need to analyze the situation.

You can hear the explosives going off just before the collapses.

You can time the collapses.

You can view the physical evidence at the Pentagon and Shanksville.

The evidence of a complete lie is there for all to see.

All the Bush acolytes and government shills in the world aren't going to change these facts!!!
===============================================================
"Because I don't want my grandchildren pissing on my grave!"
< retired Lieutenant Colonel Robert M. Bowman on why he joined the Scholars For 911 Truth>
===============================================================

[MrSammo1]

72. Honestly, LIHOP should be enough for anybody.

If they let it happen...........they made it happen!!!

[Taxloss]

82. Well, obviously this photoshop clears up everything! n/t

[MrSammo1]

118. the question mark on the wall.........

clears up at least one of the many 911 lies.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

127. There was a red question mark suspended mid-air near the WTC?

Did the reptoids put it there?

[Twist_U_Up]

131. There would have been no question mark

if there where no questions. Now would there ?

[Anarcho-Socialist]

138. So, there would be no laser beams without Jesus?

[Twist_U_Up]

141. I think we can all agree 9-11 was an inside job

[Anarcho-Socialist]

152. But what proof is there that the WTC ever existed?

I see people posting pictures all the time of it, but they might be photoshops. I don't think a building that tall could feasibly exist without supernatural forces at work.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

126. I assume the red line was from Jesus' eye-laser beams

which really destroyed the WTC.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stickdog]

151. Do you have a SHRED of physical evidence for the "raging, super

hot fire" you claim? Because NIST doesn't.

[mirandapriestly]

21. me too, that demonstration looked just like it

thanks for helping prove our point!

[maxsolomon]

2. i've been to a presentation by Skilling Ward Magnusson

the structural engineer of the WTC. we were walked through exactly how & why it collapsed in the (best possible) way that it did. i believed them.

but i must say: you've made a bold assertion, so :popcorn:

[Canuckistanian]

4. WTC - Wouldn't go there if I were you

:popcorn:

[Jara sang]

8. Still no explanation for WTC-7

Why did that fall? No plane. The big assertion for the fall of Twin Towers was that the planes slamming into the buildings caused the fire resistant material on the beams to be blow off thus exposing the beams to higher temps and thus making them structurally unsound and thus the collapse of the buildings. No planes for WTC-7 though. And why Larry Silverstein's strange comments to "pull" the building?

[salvorhardin]

13. As usual you are misquoting out of context

In the Sept. 2002 PBS documentary America Rebuils, Larry Silverstein's full quote is...

I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, “We've had such terrible loss of life that the smartest thing to do is just pull it.” And they made that decision to pull it and we watched the building collapse.
http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Sep/16-241966.html

While I think it's obvious that Silverstein was referring to pulling the firefighters out of the building to prevent any more loss of life or injury, Silverstein has since clarified his remarks through his spokesperson Dara McQuillan:

Seven World Trade Center collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours. There were no casualties, thanks to the heroism of the Fire Department and the work of Silverstein Properties employees who evacuated tenants from the building.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conducted a thorough investigation of the collapse of all the World Trade Center buildings. The FEMA report concluded that the collapse of Seven World Trade Center was a direct result of fires triggered by debris from the collapse of WTC Tower 1.

In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.

Later in the day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20 p.m. the building collapsed. No lives were lost at Seven World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

As for the cause of WTC7's collapse, the official NIST report states:

NIST’s working hypothesis for the collapse of WTC 7 is that it was caused by the collapse of a critical column due to “fire and/or debris induced structural damage.” There was substantial damage to WTC 7 when the nearby WTC 1 tower collapsed and fires began shortly afterwards. Also, WTC 7 was a very unusual building because it was built over an existing Con-Edison power generation substation, which contained two large 6,000 gallon fuel tanks for the emergency generation of power. The fuel from these tanks could have contributed to the intense heat that apparently weakened the supporting columns in WTC 7.

And that's the big problem with all of these 9-11 conspiracy theories (aside from the overt antisemitism, racism and bigotry). Tiny little shards of statements, pixelated photos, low-res and low-framerate videos are glommed onto and then repeated ad infinitum as gospel when often the evidence being claimed has been mistated, misrepresented, distorted or outright fabricated.

Guess what folks!? You got your money's worth with the NIST report. Try reading it.

[Jara sang]

14. He said "pull it" why would he refer to firemen as "it".

If you listen to Mr Silverstien's statements it clearly sounds as if he is saying "pull" the building. How is this antisemitism? You say "as usual", when have I ever taken anything out of context before? Please cite an example.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jara sang]

22. What exactly does "it" mean when he said "pull it"?

He could be referring to the fire and rescue operations, however then you would be telling me that "they"(Silverstein and NYFD) decided to just let the building burn until god knows when. How does a real estate developer have the kind of power to terminate fire and rescue operations in a major U.S. city?

[JackRiddler]

wow

You found an obscure site doubting 9/11 that the ADL calls anti-Semitic.

Well, I guess that's it then. All those anti-Semitic families of 9/11 victims and the half of that anti-Semitic New York who think Bush did it can pack it in.

Way to go.

[JackRiddler]

99. wow

You found an obscure site doubting 9/11 that the ADL calls anti-Semitic.

Well, I guess that's it then. All those anti-Semitic families of 9/11 victims and the half of that anti-Semitic New York who think Bush did it can pack it in.

Way to go.

[jschurchin]

17. I did read it. May I ask you........

a question. When did you get your degree in structural engineering?

[Taxloss]

70. When did you get yours? n/t

[jschurchin]

81. I wasn't talking to you shill.

[Taxloss]

83. Yeah, but I'm talking to you.

I'd repeat the question, but I think you have already answered.

[jschurchin]

85. English comprehension......

Not one of your stronger skill's huh?

[Taxloss]

87. At least I know where to put apostrophes.

Or "apostrophe's" as you might put it.

Answer the question.

[jschurchin]

88. Have a Good Day!

:hi: :loveya:

[Taxloss]

90. You too!

:hi:

[beam me up scottie]

9. Bravo, Taxloss

Not that it will change the minds of true believers, of course, but it is apropo that an atheist would stand up to a cult.

[Grateful for Hope]

12. Looking forward to pics of the demolition

should be very interesting.

[DemInDistress]

20. 911 was an inside job.. what was needed to cover those explosives

was a massive fire brought about with a commercial jet crash. Mark Louziauex CEO Controlled Demolitions says,"give me a week and a team and I can bring those buildings down into their footprints" collapse the basement and allow gravity to do the rest with key portions of the WTC wired. Does the US.Govt(CIA) have the expert personnel to do such a thing? Of course. Have you heard those explosions prior to each building collapse? Probably not otherwise you'd have a different view. here listen for yourself,BUT DO USE EARPHONES for best results.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3498980438587461603&q=eyewitness

Did you view the molten steel dripping from the 80th floor of WT2? Probably not, you should before you offer that B.S...here watch this.. http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc2dem2/
There are other videos here worth watching some clearly showing "white flashes" a signature of thermite cutter charges.

Do you work for the RNC? Do you accept that "Ludicrous" 911 Official Report? I DON'T, so we differ on our opinions but you seem quick to forget the dead of 911 and are willing to write them off to arabs. I WONT.

[beam me up scottie]

23. And there it is.

I bet that one of you would accuse him of working for the gubmint within the first 20 posts.

Because, as we all know, if we don't believe the whacked out fantasies paraded daily in this forum, we must work for the BFEE. :eyes:

The intellectual dishonesty in this place reeks.

[DemInDistress]

24. What ever do you mean bmus...intellectual dishonesty?

please explain.. thanks

[beam me up scottie]

25. Why is it that whenever someone voices skepticism about

MIHOP, they are accused of being a government shill?

If the theories posited here were based on actual evidence instead of rampant speculation, they could withstand criticism.

Instead, the skeptics are attacked for questioning the 911 "truth" conspiracies.

I find it more than a little ironic that the behavior exhibited by the so-called "truth seekers" is the EXACT SAME tactic used by the Bush administration whenever anyone questions their version of events.

[DemInDistress]

28. Thanks for you explanation BUT there are just 2 theories

1. 19 arabs hijacked 4 commercial jets 2 of which crashed into the WTC bringing down 3 of them. To date no skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fires.
2. 911 was an inside job, a false flag operation.
It riles me up when 911 skeptics denounce the truth seekers with their blatant disregard for lies,discrepancies and mistruths put forward by the bush crime family. Many of us and you to have questions that need answers. Supporters of that "ludicrous" 911 report need to open their eyes and not accept the bullshit (FEMA,NIST) report. Again, rather than dig deeper and explore more avenues people like the OP resort to closing the 911 case. I don't bmus..yes their entitled to their opinions but then they can expect to get hammered for it.
Who's worse, conspiracy theorist's looking for truth or that 911 conspiracy report put out by the 911 commission? If we don't find the way to the truth the dead of 911 can never be buried. In this case, your for the truth or your for the bush crime family. THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND HERE BMUS
BTW, I often look forward to your posts so please tell me where your loyalties lie? 911 truths or 911 report?
Like bush once said,"your with us or your against us" NO?

I reiterate, I like you bmus...

[beam me up scottie]

31. Then I'd hate to see how you treat people you don't like.

Stop creating false dilemmas.

That is a reichwing tactic and beneath you.


Find me one liberal who doesn't question any aspect of the official report.


One.



MIHOPers don't have a monopoly on questions, they just have one on paranoid conspiracy theories.

[DemInDistress]

35. come on bmus..reichwing or right-wing ? your not implying

I'm a disruptor/flamer or stand for anything less than the truth regarding the SEPT.11 2001 ATTACKS. Remember I said,"there is no middle ground" your for that "ludicrous" 911 report and against the theory that our government/cia and larry silverstein/mossad were behind 911 or your against that "bullshit report" no matter how much window dressing they added. Where are you bmus? For the debunker's to insinuate the case is closed because NIST AND FEMA says so is "shitting on the dead of 911". The OP said," look see the preparation it takes to bring down this building" case closed on 911. His obstinacy requires a rebuke. No middle ground here my friend. And stop calling me names.
I live in NYC, I supported that Imbecile on 911 and when I felt I was lied to I got off that train wreck. Now today I support MIHOP. Evidence supports MIHOP and until those M-U-R-D-E-R-E-R-S in DC come forward and release the thousands of photo's videos and other pertinent facts surrounding 911 I will always trash and bash 911 debunker's. Unless they have a plausible explanation which is highly unlikely.
Sybil Edmonds
Dave Schippers
Willie Rodriguez
Indira Singh
Countless others who were refused when requests for their appearance at the commission were brought forward.
bmus, I can go on and on but whats the use you seem to be hell bent on supporting that OP.
And I do like you. You enhanced my post of that dripping molten steel from the 80th floor of WT2.. remember?

[beam me up scottie]

38. I don't live in your world, sorry.

I don't fit into either one of your two boxes.

Nothing posited by MIHOPers offers anything other than speculation and a desperate attempt to blame a shadow government for everything bad that happens.


I came here originally to see if I could find answers to some of my questions, but I soon found out that most obsessive MIHOPers aren't looking for answers.

They lie down with the worst gutter trash the right has to offer in order to find scraps of facts that can be manipulated to fit their pet theory.


They have already arrived at a conclusion and are looking for anything that can be used to support it.


And they let nothing get in their way, including former friends and allies.


I want no part of a "movement" that sets the bar so low that nothing is beneath them.


I'll continue the search for truth elsewhere.

[DemInDistress]

40. WHAT TRUTH IS THAT SCOTTY

osama did it? lol

THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND,"YOU WITH US OR AGAINST US" THAT SIMPLE !! SORRY TO SEE YOU GO. I DID LIKE YOU.

[Taxloss]

76. Fair is foul and foul is fair ... hover through the fog and filthy air ...

This isn't a matter of standing with MIHOP or supporting Bush, it's a horribly complicated situation. But your outburst says a lot about your mindset.

[greyl]

161. You supported Bush on 9/11?

Late bloomer?

[mirandapriestly]

26. Can I have an example of "intellectual dishonesty" please?

If you don't like it, don't come here, what's your problem?
I think this demolition "demonstration" does more to convince for demolition than not.

[beam me up scottie]

27. Do you ever think for yourself or do you just parrot everyone else?

If you don't want us to post here, get over it.

This isn't your personal echo chamber.



And if you really think this demonstration bolsters MIHOP, you've obviously got no use for anything intellectual.

[mirandapriestly]

30. who did I "parrot"(wtf)?

maybe you said something so stupid that more than one person asked you what you meant. (you never answered). I didn't say I didn't want you to post here, get your facts straight, I asked you why you did post here when you think it is so "intellectually dishonest" which you obviously can't explain. You sound like someone who needs to feel superior to others by putting them down with (baseless)insults like telling me that I am parroting (wtf?) others and comparing DU's 911 forum to the Bush administration , how ridiculous! Obviously , you can't get away with treating people like this on GD or elsewhere so you come here to try to puff out your chest.
This is the only place I have to post about or "talk " about this. It is something that I feel very strongly about and have spent hours researching, it is a huge outlet for me. But, people like you want to do your best to make sure it is not a safe place either.

My 8 year old thinks she is too old for hello kitty, mr or ms "intellectual".

[beam me up scottie]

32. Was that as painful to type as it was to read?

I sure hope so.

[mirandapriestly]

33. People who brag about being smart

never are.

[beam me up scottie]

34. Jeez, you think Cthulu is Hello Kitty?

:rofl:

[mirandapriestly]

37. I'm proud that I don't know.nt

[file83]

47. Exactly, I've noticed people seem to come here to abuse and ridicule

LIHOP/MIHOP supporters in the "September 11" forums. They always start out with the usual tired old "I'm the level headed one" - but as soon as we mention our reasoning/opinion/arguments, they resort to "you conspiracy nuts!" or some such negative/general attack.

WE GET IT. You guys believe the 9/11 Commision. We understand that. You swallowed the blue pill. What do you have to prove by coming here? That you can be mean spirited and abusive to people that think differently than you? Patronize us some more. Try and be a little MORE condescending. Because you can never prove to us enough of your intellectual superiority. :sarcasm:

Why don't you go start your own "9/11 Commision Supporters" thread? Argue amongst yourselves over....whatever it is you would argue about(?).

[Taxloss]

51. Actually, this thread was moved by the mods from GD.

Of course, MIHOPers are never shrill, patronising, abusive or mean-spirited.

And there's that old lie - that if you don't believe in MIHOP you believe in the official version. That's Manichean nonsense.

[file83]

74. Oh, contraire, Mr. Manichean. More accurately, if you don't believe

in the 9/11 Commission Report, then must be a "nutty conspiracy theorist". That's the prevailing attitude against us around here.

If I'm wrong, then why are discussions of weather modification, "Christ visiting ancient America", the possibility of Katrina detention camps, "Planning Scenarios" by the DHS (about the FUTURE), and any official 9/11 news being moved down here to the "September 11" dungeon, Mr. Manichean?

[Taxloss]

80. Because they're all equally nuts?

I'm not the one moving them, you know, so there's no point asking me. And you're completely - I would say wilfully - wrong about the "prevailing attitude". I don't think there's a single DUer who believes every word of the 9/11 commission report. But there are only a handful of nutty conspiracy theorists.

[mirandapriestly]

66. thanks,I was embarrassed by my outburst, but

I meant it.

[Twist_U_Up]

133. Very well put mirandapriestly

some people :eyes:

[salvorhardin]

29. Doesn't it bother you that the whole "9-11 Truth movement"

Is rife with antisemites, neonazis and other wonderful characters?

[file83]

49. Could you please make a more encompassing generalization?

Go on, I bet you could. You seem to be pretty good at it.

[Taxloss]

52. Its websites are never more than two clicks away from

antisemitic material.

There, a specific and measurable charge.

[JackRiddler]

100. So now I know which conspiracy theory you prefer...

A conspiracy of sites that are but two clicks away.

[salvorhardin]

58. Antisemitic and racist ideology *are* part of the conspiracist narrative

Antisemitic and racist ideology *are* part of the conspiracist narrative of the "9-11 Truth movement"

I've demonstrated quite specifically how the antisemitic far-right and neonazis are directly involved in the flap over Larry Silverstein, and how the famous holocaust denier David Irving (now http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4733820.stm">in jail in Austria) is behind many of these allegations and conspiracist fantasies involving Silverstein. In a deleted thread from yesterday I demonstrated how Eric Hufschmid is a racist conspiracist and a David Duke supporter. I've shown how many of the websites favored by the "9-11 Truth movement" such as rbnlive.com promote far right antisemitic and/or racist conspiracist narratives. The poster Monkey see Monkey Do mentioned that RNBLive's "Michael Collins Piper is a neo-nazi who believes Mossad assassinated JFK".

I have been very specific in my charges and my conclusion is that the whole "9-11 Truth movement" is rife with these sorts of despicable characters and organizations. I am not the only one to make these connections or to be distressed that my fellow lefties parrot and support the antisemitic, racist scapegoating of the far right.

Antisemitism After September 11th
By Esther Kaplan
http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v16n2/AntisemitismAfter.html

To White supremacists across the United States, the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were a cause for celebration. On a radio broadcast that week, William Pierce, head of the neonazi National Alliance, called the attacks “a direct consequence of the American people permitting the Jews to control their government and to use American strength to advance the Jews’ interests at the expense of everyone else's interests.”<1> He victoriously announced the dawn of a “new era,” in which Jewish money, and Jewish manipulation of the media and the U.S. government are “no longer are enough to guarantee the Jews’ continued hegemony.”<2>

James “Bo” Gritz, a Patriot Movement leader and former Green Beret, suggested that it was the “high concentration of influential Jews” that made New York and Washington, D.C., attractive targets,<3> an idea echoed by the likes of Swiss neonazi Ahmed Huber and the Posse Comitatus militia in jubilant references to the attacks on “Jew York.”<4> As reports began to emerge of a surge of anti-Muslim violence across the United States, World Church of the Creator leader Matt Hale wrote to his listserve: “Now we have to help channel this hatred toward the Jews.”<5> He urged his followers to proselytize that the attacks were due to “the control of the United States government by International Jewry and its lackeys. Perhaps never before,” he added, “have people been so receptive to our message.”<6>

So I do not think I am overgeneralizing when I say that the entire "9-11 Truth movement" is rife with antisemites, neonazis and other wonderful characters.

[Maven]

59. The upper east side has its share of anti-semites too.

Just try to join certain co-op buildings with the "wrong" last name and you'll see what I mean.

I haven't seen ANYONE here attack Silverstein directly, and certainly not on the basis of his religion or ethnicity.

So stop trying to push the idea that if you subscribe to a MIHOP variant you're somehow "in bed with" bigots. One thing has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

[salvorhardin]

61. Did I say that?

No, I did NOT say that. What I said was that almost all of the "9-11 Truth" paranoid conspiracy theories originate with bigots. I did NOT say that if you believe in MIHOP you are in bed with the bigots. However, if you traffic in 9-11 conspiracy theories you are helping to promote a antisemitic and/or racist conspiracist worldview.

[Maven]

63. "if you traffic in 9-11 conspiracy theories you are helping to promote

a antisemitic and/or racist conspiracist worldview."

Nonsense.

But I like the way you juxtapose the word "conspiracist" with the word "racist" in order to imply that they're dialectically linked.

Problem is, as a I stated before, one thing has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the other.

Believing the government brought down the towers with the complicity of Larry Silverstein is not the same thing as calling 9/11 a "Jewish conspiracy." If there are some who would call it that, they don't represent anyone here or for that matter on any other serious 9/11 review website I've read.

This is the same kind of distorted logic republicans use when they nominate some heinous ideologue who happens to be black. All of a sudden, if you oppose the candidate, you're a "racist."

Edit: The official government story is also a conspiracy theory. Only their theory puts Arabs at the helm. Would you also call believers of the official story "racists?"

[file83]

67. Bulls Eye. Thank you for that perfect rebuttal.

:applause:

[maddiejoan]

97. I'd call them anti-semites

Or are we forgetting that Arabs are semitic.

[Maven]

98. Not at all.

I just used the word "racist" to avoid confusion.

[maddiejoan]

102. I know :)

Was just re-enforcing your point.

[Taxloss]

103. When referring to hatred of Jews,

"anti-semitism" is a good enough term for the UN, for most governments, for the media, and for academia. But not for the MIHOPers. What term would you use to describe fear and loathing of Jews? Or are you planning to stick with your quaint, 1930s system of racial classification?

[maddiejoan]

125. First off. Bucko.

I never said "anti-semitism" isn't the right term for hatred of Jews. I merely stated that hatred of Arabs is ALSO anti-semitism.

Secondly, my patronizing little friend, I AM jewish so stick your "quaint" up your tuchus.

[Taxloss]

129. If you are Jewish, you should know better.

What, exactly, did you hope to achieve with your pedantic smugness? A back-handed implication that I'm prejudiced against Arabs? A suggestion that you have to be prejudiced against Arabs as well as Jews in order to be truly anti-semitic? Or are you simply working on semantics because you don't have any other defences?

As for using the term "anti-semitic" in precisely the sense that I meant it, with no footnotes or qualifications - if it's good enough for the Anti-Defamation League, it's good enough for me.

But you're right that "quaint" is the wrong word. It implies charming. "Anachronistic" or "outdated" would be better.

Maddie, seriously, take a long, hard look at the sources of most of these MIHOP fantasies. You won't like what you see.

[maddiejoan]

130. who are you, my mother?

My one and only point had nothing to do with you.

It is simply that the "official" story of 19 Arabs hijacking four planes and flying them into buildings is itself "anti-arab" and so can also be deemed "anti-semitic". There is nothing anacronistic about aknowledging that Arabs are also semitic.

I have nothing to defend --and your painting ME as an anti-semite simply because I subscribe to MIHOP conspiracys is frankly repulsive.
Your implication that I need to "take a long, hard look" at anything implies that I have not --and is again insulting.

Tell ya what pisses me off the most as a Jew --is other Jews whoi question whether I'm Jewish enough if I don't buy into every little lockstep concept that they think is appropriate for me to think.

A shonda and a hora.

[Taxloss]

135. I'm not painting you as an anti-semite.

However, the very, very first MIHOP theories are very openly anti-semitic. In October 2001, the story that Jewish workers at the WTC didn't turn up on the day of the attack was in circulation. Meanwhile, in the Middle East, the theory that Israel and its supporters in the USA had caused the attack in order to discredit the Arab and Muslim worlds was in circulation within a week. Like it or not, the earliest MIHOP "research" was carried out on an almost exclusively anti-semitic basis. And that basic DNA persists, polluting MIHOP to this day - sites like Rense and What Really Happened are riddled with it. That's the real "shame and disgrace" here, chev r' mann.

(Incidentally, who was piloting the planes? If it had been, say, Belgians, would suggesting that the government didn't do it make one anti-Belgian? A crime is a crime.)

[maddiejoan]

137. Did it ever occur to you there's a reason?

That linking truth to disgusting practices like anti-semitism are EXACTLY the sort of tactics used by the Government to discredit facts.

It's the oldest trick in the book and you are falling for it.

[seatnineb]

156. Ohh......I guess Haaretz are also anti -semitic!

Last update - 00:43 26/09/2001

Odigo says workers were warned of attack

By Yuval Dror

Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=77744

Gee.....I guess that al-quida have a soft spot for 2 workers at Odigo!

[Taxloss]

167. So you're saying that some Jews in the towers WERE warned?

That's your position? Yes or no, please.

[seatnineb]

168. It was a non-specific warning...........

Also.......Odigo's headquarters is based in New York.

So I am not sure if Odigo's employees are all Jewish or of Irsaeli citizenship.

Odigo probably employs non-Jewish and Non Israeli people .

The most important fact about this story is that 2 employees were warned BEFORE the attacks about something.

That is the most important thing.

Odigo is working with the FBI to identify the sender of a message to two recipients in the company's international sales office and research-and-development office in Herzliya, Israel, Alex Diamandis, the company's vice president of sales and marketing, confirmed in an e-mail.

The message was a nonspecific threat that didn't mention the World Trade Center, Diamandis said. "It was the timing that made it unusual."


http://www.computerworld.com/storyba/0,4125,NAV47_STO64334,00.html

[Twist_U_Up]

134. Huh, that about silenced that conversation. Very Well Done nt

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[salvorhardin]

64. Yes, those two certainly

I covered Mike Rivero and WhatReallyHappened's beginnings as the originators of the "the Clintons assassinated Vince Foster" nonsense here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=247&topic_id=4533&mesg_id=4544

And I've seen people here on DU happily linking to and quoting from Willis Carto's TBRNews as well.

Thanks for chiming in.

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

73. Thankfully I haven't seen TBRNews on here for a while

I don't know if "The Voice of the White House" has stopped, or whether it's just fallen out of fashion. (Ditto with Wayne Madsen & Tom Flocco for that matter.)

An aside on TBRNews - as I'm sure you know, the webmaster Gregory Douglas (aka Walter Storch, Peter Stahl, etc) has penned several books based upon documents he's forged. One - Regicide - is about the Kennedy assassination and Jim "9/11 Scholar for Truth" Fetzer" was one of the first to review it. He did so on both Amazon.com and the conspiracy radio show "Black Op Radio" where he was ecstatic about how it really did solve the case and how great Douglas was. (The only doubts he raised that I recall were that the DIA and KGB studies - both forged - claimed there were only 3 shots fired, where Fetzer knew there were 8 or more shots fired, 4 hitting Kennedy.) A week or so later Fetzer discovered that Douglas was a known forger and that the documents were bogus and did a U-turn. However his revised review of Regicide at Amazon is worth reading by anybody who takes him seriously as aside from reassigning it 1-star(*), he hardly damns it for the fountain of lies it is (which he does with anything that disagrees with him from Case Closed to people who thankfully remain unconvinced that the Zapruder film was altered.

(*)Assigning this book 1-star, however, really does not do it justice. This is a fascinating book on one of the most important events of the 20th century. I am dumbfounded that it has yet to become the object of public controversy. The prospect that it will, alas, is quite remote, given the control
exercised over the media in America, as articles here also explain. Talk radio remains one of the last bastions of free speech in the US. May it long endure!
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v1n2/preface.pdf

btw, any idea how to respond to this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=197606&mesg_id=197686

[salvorhardin]

77. Ah, truthiness at its' finest

Honestly, I don't know how you can respond to somebody that believes it doesn't matter whether something is true or not, that antisemitism is a meaningless term and that "it should be obvious who is in control of America's government." I do have a source on that quote and will leave it in that thread.

If you google, or check my journal, you'll see that the blogger (and dKossack) Dr. Laniac did some great amateur sleuthing on Walter Storch and Dandelion Books. I actually didn't know about Gregory Douglas' forgeries.

BTW: Do you know if Szymanski happens to be a real person or what his background might be? At one time I thought he might be another invention of Gregory Douglas.

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

92. There's a photo purporting to be of Szymanski at that radio link above

Per his site, he's been writing articles since the end of 2004 and he has 2 radio shows, but I don't think I've come across any background on him. The Carto link is obviously suspicious, although I'm slightly suprised that an AFP writer also writes on UFO's, SRA & other conspiracy bullshit (because Holocaust denial is so not bollocks :) ).

Gotta dash, but quickly on Douglas --- I've never really looked into why (prob. connected to his books on Heinrich Mueller - again based on forgeries) but he royally pissed off David Irving. I'm speculating, but I wonder whether the Whitehouse deep throat stuff wasn't a way of fishing for converts among the left after the neo-nazi community had begun dumping him.

Oh and I wanted to say something about how the right has created the notion of "Gatekeepers" who are always on the left (Chomsky, Amy Goodman, The Nation, etc - there's a cute (if incomprehensible) diagram if you haven't seen it) to keep people away from progressive sources of news.

[salvorhardin]

93. So-Called Liberal Media Gatekeepers

It's also interesting that the right is now using charges of antisemitism against these so-called gatekeepers (like Chomsky and the others you mentioned). David Horowitz in particular comes to mind.

I had that Szymanski photo in my research notes.

As far as Gregory Douglas pissing off David Irving, well, that's a grand tradition among the far right conspiracists. Carto was expunged from the John Birch Society and in turn over the years has managed to piss off just about every one he works with. Of course, these people then spin-off their own looney-toon theories and organizations to propagate them, piss off or get pissed at their associates and employees and the cycle repeats. I think it has to do with the fact that paranoia is just so inextricably a part of everything they do that they're primed to see the smallest infraction as an act against them. Richard Hofstadter noted in The Paranoid Style In American Politics that perhaps the big irony in all of this is that the paranoid conspiracist comes to emulate the very people s/he fears.
http://www.neuralgourmet.com/theparanoidstyle

[JackRiddler]

101. Yeah, just keep doing that!

Beat that strawman! Get Rivero!

[Taxloss]

50. Ah yes, those explosions that were heard.

Beyond the fact that the conflagration following the collision of a jet fighter into a 100+-storey building would naturally be somewhat noisy, and that steel is a fine conductor of sound (ever been on a ship?), I suggest you try the following experiment:

1. Purchase a leg of lamb.

2. Get a friend to drop it out of a second-floor window onto concrete or tarmac so that it lands near you.

3. Describe the sound - it is a flat crack or thud.

Now imagine the sound made by a human body that has had plenty of time to achieve terminal velocity.

But what is sound other than a shock wave? Explosives would produce a supersonic shock wave that could easily be seen in the dust, debris and smoke. But in the weeks-worth other footage, nothing more than these anaemic flashes can be gathered as evidence. Indicative of thermite cutters? Sure, and indicative of a Jean Michel Jarre concert, but I'm not arguing he was in the building.

You, however, supply the best evidence yourself in the confused nature of your argument. The demolition was with explosives - no, with thermite cutters. It was hidden in the basement; no, it's visible in these film clips. So which of these stories, towering theses built on the slenderest bits of evidence, do you support? Plus, do you think this team that was working in the basement for a week (make that two weeks - two towers) could do so undetected? Look again at the Landmark picture - this isn't a job that would require simply sellotaping red stick of dynamite to pillars and playing out fuses, it would invole stripping down the structure - noisy, to say the least. Dusty, also - asbestos dust, which would require special removal procedures.

But there's not a hint of any of this.

Incidentally, there's no evidence that what appears in that video is molten steel. It is probably molten aluminium. You know, the stuff they build planes from.

That's dealt with your arguments. Now I'll deal with your lies. For a start, there's your suggestion that just because someone doesn't buy MIHOP, they consider the official report to be the whole truth. Transparent rubbish. It was a whitewash to cover-up the complacency and incompetence of the administration. And then there's your grotesquely offensive assertion that non-MIHOPers have "forgotten the dead of 911". I advise you to retract that. I no more want to see their deaths used to further your insidious agenda than I like seeing their deaths being used to further Bush's insidious agenda. A lie is a lie, whether it's your lie or Bush's lie. MIHOP is pure poison to the progressive movement.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Taxloss]

104. From the same website

that suggests small nuclear bombs were used to destroy the towers and appears to have a bee in its bonnet over weather control. Oh, and it links directly to Rense, what a surprise. You really should get better source material.

[DemInDistress]

41. In your demo, neatness counts however on SEPT 11 2001 the

object was to bring down those buildings and neatness didn't count. When legit companies come forward to implode a building all caution is used but not on 911. The higher the death count the more patriotism would follow, hell even I was fooled and supported that scumbag MURDERER. but as the weeks and months passed what did we learn? Rudy shipped out to China crime scene evidence, why? King George the Imbecile and his dick refused to cooperate with the investigation, why? Our FBI confiscated pertinent videotapes,why? Many individuals with suspicions were not allowed to later testify at the 911 hearings, why? There are 100 questions that need to be answered and King George the Imbecile and his dick refuse to cooperate, why? Marvin Bush head of WTC security "pulled out the bomb sniffing dogs 1 week before 911, why? But most of all
World Trade 7 collapsed, how? There were 2 reported fires, one on the 7th (cia) and one on the 12th (S.E.C.) was it arson? What were they destroying? Tell me please !!
911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB .....

[Kevin Fenton]

42. Controlled demolition

You wrote "That's why it took the demo teams so long to strip down and prep the building. It's a vast and complicated operation - but that's what it takes to get a structure this big to fall "just right"."
If the WTC had fallen just right, this would be a good argument. However, given that a casual glance at any video of the collapse shows that it clearly didn't fall just right, but spewed debris several hundred feet in all directions, the argument is meaningless and I am surprised you are making it. Or are you suggesting that a building won't collapse at all unless you take the furniture out first?

"Not one window blew out?"
Lots of windows blew out. If you look at this film:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change
(warning: the commentary is not very good - watch it with the sound off)
then at 34:42 you can see the start of the collapse of WTC 2 from the east. Watch floor 77 - you can see multiple jets coming out and smashing windows.
Also, if there were explosives on the mechanical floors, what windows are you suggesting they should smash?

[Taxloss]

54. Floor 77 is directly below the jet impact.

I looked at the video - it seems perfectly consistent with the start of the progressive failure of the floor plates. And no explosive shockwave is evident.

As for explosives in the basement, they would directly resonate against the outside structure of the towers, smashing lower-storey windows (maybe the fist 10 floors - and all these glass in those huge atria). This did not happen. And it's impressive that the explosives could be installed without interfering with the plant in the mechanical areas. Especially considering the amount of asbestos dust involved.

As for falling "just right", I mean "not toppling over". I thought this was a central plank of explosive MIHOP - that the towers fell downwards.

[Kevin Fenton]

55. Perfectly consistent?

"It seems perfectly consistent with the start of the progressive failure of the floor plates."
How can the clearly seen ejections on floor 77 (which, by the way, line up very nicely with the core columns) be consistent with the failure of the floor plates(?) on the collapse initiation floor, which was very probably in the low 80s. If floor 81 failed first, then the ejections should be from floor 80, not floor 77. How could ejections caused by falling floors possibly skip a couple of storeys?
If the floor of 78 were buckling, would not one of the several witnesses there during the 56 minutes the tower burned (for example the fire chief who reported back from 78 just before it collapsed) have noticed this?

In addition, the very same pattern is visible in the North Tower. If you look at this series of stills showing the North Tower from the north:
http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/wtc1_close_frames.html
you can see that the bottom fire floor, 92, clearly "explodes" before the three floors above it (but seemingly a fraction after 96), although the plane missed 92 altogether and the wingtip that hit 93 was not even strong enough to sever the perimeter columns.

What sort of explosive shockwave are you saying should be produced by charges fixed to core columns?

"As for explosives in the basement, they would directly resonate against the outside structure of the towers, smashing lower-storey windows."
Why should a charge fixed to a core column in the basement smash lower storey windows? Why cannot a charge be sized in such a manner that it simply cuts the column to which it is fixed, then produces a "jet" that travels a couple of dozen feet in one direction?

"And it's impressive that the explosives could be installed without interfering with the plant in the mechanical areas. Especially considering the amount of asbestos dust involved."
Why would fixing charges to the core columns in the mechanical floors (for example from the lift shafts) interfere with the plant in the mechanical areas?

The reason buildings are prepared for a long time before controlled demolition is to increase the degree of certainty - especially important if there is going to be a crowd. There was one unfortunate incident in Australia where the building was badly prepared and a chunk of concrete flew out and killed a little girl watching. You can destroy a building without preparing it, but the chances of it falling neatly down into a neat pile are not great.

[Taxloss]

57. So The hijackers had to aim for specific floors?

And arrange where the explosives were placed to appear correct? And this would be judged by sight, from a speeding jet? And the explosives were set up without office workers on those floors noticing? And they were certain the explosives and there trigger mechanisms would survive the impact and a drenching from burning jet fuel and whatever other plumbing was broken?

Or were the explosives on those floors just by happy chance? Or were they placed on several floors?

An explosive shockwave at the core would resonate the entire building. Buildings, all buildings, are covered in loose filth, especially if they've just been showered in ash and debris. That would be clearly witnessed as a wave passing up the building.

Part of the preparations for a controlled demolition is to remove all the windows, because they will almost inevitably blow out wherever the explosives are placed, scattering broken glass. This did not happen on the lower floors.

[Kevin Fenton]

115. Nice try at changing the subject, but I don't mind...

... your new talking points aren't any better than your old ones.

"So the hijackers had to aim for specific floors?"
No. There were charges on several floors.

"And arrange where the explosives were placed to appear correct?"
They do not appear correct. There is a big hole in the south wall of the south tower centred on floors 80 and 81. There are explosions coming from the east wall of floor 77. In the North Tower there are explosions coming from floor 92, which was barely scratched by the plane.

"And the explosives were set up without office workers on those floors noticing?"
Why would an office worker notice a charge being placed inside a lift shaft? To the best of my knowledge, when inside the elevator shafts the WTC's occupants travelled in elevator cars and would not have seen any charges inside the shafts but outside the cars.

"An explosive shockwave at the core would resonate the entire building. Buildings, all buildings, are covered in loose filth, especially if they've just been showered in ash and debris. That would be clearly witnessed as a wave passing up the building."
Up? Don't you mean down? This is a fairly unusual objection - I think you need to specify it in more detail. For example, you might say why there would be one shockwave, how the ash and debris got onto the lower floors before the collapse and why you think it must go up the building.

"Part of the preparations for a controlled demolition is to remove all the windows, because they will almost inevitably blow out wherever the explosives are placed, scattering broken glass. This did not happen on the lower floors."
Again, this is a fairly unusual claim, most people generally accept that, when the towers collapsed, the windows broke. Please produce at least one witness account, photograph or video recording describing or showing a window that is not broken, but should be in your opinion.

[Taxloss]

119. "Talking points"

Such a splendid way of attempting to shut down discussion of an uncomfortable observation.

"There were charges on several floors."

If we take this to be true, then I think it's safe to assume that the charges would be placed on the same floors in both towers. So if there were explosions on floor 92 of North tower, there would be undetonated explosives on floor 92 of the South Tower. What happened to these explosives.

Also, are you suggesting that a demo team was watching the towers and saying "er, 92 is close enough". And you have yet to make the case that these ARE explosions, despite your attempt to shift the terms of debate.

"When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window ... but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

- NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder

Incidentally, progressive collapse could start either above the impact area (removal of support) or below (weight of debris).

Also, surely the windows wouldn't just blow out on the one floor that was detonated, would they? One bomb did all this:



"Why would an office worker notice a charge being placed inside a lift shaft?"

Sarcasm, cute. If I worked in a 100-storey building, I would notice if the lifts were out of order. Or are you suggesting the lifts were fully powered and in motion while teams worked in the shaft? Because - trust me on this - that would be tricky. And that applies to the evenings and weekends as well. How much time would be needed, and how many people would this operation take?

"Up? Don't you mean down? This is a fairly unusual objection - I think you need to specify it in more detail. For example, you might say why there would be one shockwave, how the ash and debris got onto the lower floors before the collapse and why you think it must go up the building."

It would travel up and down the building if explosives were placed above ground level - as I said, the entire building would resonate. It would just travel up the building if the explosives were in the basement.

How did ash and debris get onto the lower floors? You can see a fair amount of it falling in pictures like this:



"Most people generally accept that, when the towers collapsed, the windows broke. Please produce at least one witness account, photograph or video recording describing or showing a window that is not broken, but should be in your opinion."

You're misreading what I said. Of course the windows broke when the towers collapsed. But the windows on the lower floor did not break immediately before collapse, suggesting that there were no explosions in the basement.

By the way, I would find it easier to credit MIHOP if it was at least consistent in its claims. Were the explosives in the core, or in the basement, or both? Were they conventional charges, thermite, or both, or something else?

Plus, there are the dogs that didn't bark. The 37,000 WTC workers who report none of this. And the defence teams for those charged in connection with 11 September. And any one of the teams involved in setting things up. Not a whisper.

[beam me up scottie]

120. I'm no expert

but I sincerely doubt security was that lax at the WTC considering this wasn't the first time it was attacked by terrorists.

But no, nobody noticed a thing.:eyes:

[DemInDistress]

122. gee no lax security...what could have happened to the bomb sniffing dogs?

Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday . Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday , bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.

Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down

On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."

Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11



http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911security.html

[Kevin Fenton]

121. Your unusual claims

"I think it's safe to assume that the charges would be placed on the same floors in both towers."
Give or take, that should be about right.

"So if there were explosions on floor 92 of North tower, there would be undetonated explosives on floor 92 of the South Tower."
No, why would they not have been set off?

"Also, are you suggesting that a demo team was watching the towers and saying "er, 92 is close enough"."
Yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting.

"And you have yet to make the case that these ARE explosions."
The case for explosives has two planks; briefly:
(1) The damage is not adequate to cause a collapse - the impacts took away only 15% of the building's structure. There's no way office fires lasting 56 and 102 minutes could account for enough of the structure to induce collapse.
(2) There are two possible explanations for the ejections - either they are "squibs" from charges or ejections caused by pancaking floors. I am suggesting they are "squibs" from charges, because, for example:
(a) They are not seen from all floors. If the building pancaked, then we would expect to see broadly the same phenomena on all floors. The "squibs"/ejections are clearly not appearing from all floors. It is clear that explosives do not have to be set on all floors, but how can ejections from a pancake-like collapse bypass a floor?
(b) In many instances they can be seen to be in line with the core columns. It is clear why charges placed on core columns would exit the building at the corresponding place in the perimeter wall. However, why would pancaking floors shoot out jets in line with core columns?
(c) The fixed-point camera that vibrates before the North Tower collapses;
(d) They look like them, compare the "squibs" in Loose Change to squibs from any other explosive demolition.

"Incidentally, progressive collapse could start either above the impact area (removal of support) or below (weight of debris)."
No, it wouldn't. It would start in the middle of the impact area, where the damage was the most. The most damaged floor must fail first.

"Also, surely the windows wouldn't just blow out on the one floor that was detonated, would they? One bomb did all this:"
Bombs/charges come in different strengths. Perhaps the bomb that did that was a big one, not a series of cutter charges attached to the building's structure.

"If I worked in a 100-storey building, I would notice if the lifts were out of order. Or are you suggesting the lifts were fully powered and in motion while teams worked in the shaft?"
Sarcasm, cute. The elevators in the WTC were arranged in banks. It would be possible to take one elevator in a bank out of service, whilst keeping the rest in service. Thus, workers in the building would not be inconvenienced. Alternatively, freight elevator shafts could be used.

"How much time would be needed, and how many people would this operation take?"
The amount of time needed would be inversely proportional to the number of people. I think I'll go for lots of time and 4 people.

I asked you to explain why you think the building would resonate, but all you did is repeat the claim that it would resonate. How about an explanation?

The debris in the photo appear to be outside the building. Why do you think they would subsequently be ejected from inside the building? How would they get in?

"But the windows on the lower floor did not break immediately before collapse, suggesting that there were no explosions in the basement."
Again, I asked you for an account confirming this. You did not provide one. Does that mean you don't have one?

"Were the explosives in the core, or in the basement, or both?"
Why do you think there was no core in the basement?

"Were they conventional charges, thermite, or both, or something else?"
How the hell am I supposed to tell exactly what sort of charges were used from viewing the photos, videos, etc.

"The 37,000 WTC workers who report none of this."
There were not 37,000 WTC workers. Did you make the number up yourself or did you get it from somebody who made it up?

What, specifically, would you like them to report?

[Maven]

65. Yet again, more discussion of "progressive failure of the floor plates"

without any reference to the 47 massive steel columns that supported the building's gravitational load. Apparently they must have just evaporated. Wait, I know: They were shopping across the street at Century 21 when the planes hit. Gosh, were their steely faces ever red! They're now living in exile on Barbados.

[Taxloss]

68. Massive, yes.

Massive and, under Earth's gravity, very very heavy. The towers were braced by the floor plates - without the bracing, they aren't self-supporting.

So when the floor plates started to go, they weren't shopping in Century 21. They were in The Gap.

[Maven]

75. Essentially you're espousing the view that

the WTC was built like a house of cards. Remove one element, and all other redundant support structures fail in succession, without any vertical resistance whatsoever. You're saying that the very force those columns were meant to withstand--gravity--instantly became their achilles heel once far weaker support structures were removed. Sorry, I just don't find that to be a credible conception of the towers' construction or modern architecture in general.

Just for shits and giggles, how do you explain the near-zero-resistance timing of the fall of all three buildings?

P.S. "The Gap" did give me a chuckle.

[Taxloss]

79. Do you understand how structural bracing works?

Because I don't think you do.

A braced structure is inherently far stronger than an unbraced structure. To demonstrate this, get a toilet roll, stand it on its end, and push down on it. You will find it quite hard to crush. Get another roll, and this time slit it on each side. When you press it down, it will be easier to crush.

The columns were only meant to withstand gravity as part of a braced structure. The core could not have stood on its own; the outer envelope could not have stood on its own. The two structures were interdependent, braced by the floor plates.

One floor plate fails, brings down another, and another, and another, and the bracing disappears. The upper floors are now a dead weight on top of a damaged envelope and a damaged core.

And down they go. Total structural failure.

And it's not "the removal of one element" - about two floors worth of debris smashed down on a third floor and got rapidly covered in burning jet fuel. That is an extreme external event.

[Maven]

84. You didn't answer my timing question, nor can you explain WTC 7

under that theory. Though I notice the condescension mounting.

In any event, I will be speaking to two professors at the Cooper Union School of Architecture next Weds. Will report back with their opinions.

[Taxloss]

89. I'll do you a deal.

As soon as we're done with WTC1 and WTC2, I'll talk about WTC7.

On the subject of speed of collapse, it's actually impossible to tell thanks to the dust and debris. We'll never know how it looked or progressed through the middle and later stages. But I can tell you that once a building that heavy starts to fall, not a lot can slow it down.

I would be interested in what your professors have to say.

[Maven]

91. Please

Why not put it all out on the table? Why the dilatory "deal-making?"

I find your argument on the speed of collapse unconvincing. Certainly, WTC 7's implosion has been heavily documented, beginning, middle, and end.

"Once a building that heavy starts to fall, not a lot can slow it down."

No body is exempt from simple physical laws, no matter how heavy (well, at least on Earth). Dust notwithstanding, even a few seconds leeway deviating in either direction from the observable duration of the event is insufficient to explain the resistance necessarily encountered by higher floors under your theory.

Once again, I will raise all of these issues on Weds. and report back.

[LARED]

96. Just for giggles

explain why you believe there was near-zero-resistance in the fall of all three buildings?

[Kai]

124. New Weapons Technology -- Superthermites/Nanotechnology

The Landmark Tower was taken down with conventional controlled demolition technology. It seems likely to me that the WTC buildings were brought down using newer technologies. This article from MIT's Technology Review details one such technology.

Military Reloads with Nanotech
http://www.technologyreview.com/NanoTech/wtr_14105,318,p1.html
January 2005

excerpt;
Smaller. Cheaper. Nastier. Those are the guiding principles behind the military's latest bombs. The secret ingredient: nanotechnology that makes for a bigger boom.

By John Gartner

Nanotechnology is grabbing headlines for its potential in advancing the life sciences and computing research, but the Department of Defense (DoD) found another use: a new class of weaponry that uses energy-packed nanometals to create powerful, compact bombs.

With funding from the U.S. government, Sandia National Laboratories, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory are researching how to manipulate the flow of energy within and between molecules, a field known as nanoenergentics, which enables building more lethal weapons such as "cave-buster bombs" that have several times the detonation force of conventional bombs such as the "daisy cutter" or MOAB (mother of all bombs).

Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide, according to Steven Son, a project leader in the Explosives Science and Technology group at Los Alamos.

"The advantage (of using nanometals) is in how fast you can get their energy out," Son says.

Son says that the chemical reactions of superthermites are faster and therefore release greater amounts of energy more rapidly.

"Superthermites can increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times," Son says, resulting in a very rapid reactive wave.

Son, who has been working on nanoenergetics for more than three years, says that scientists can engineer nanoaluminum powders with different particle sizes to vary the energy release rates. This enables the material to be used in many applications, including underwater explosive devices, primers for igniting firearms, and as fuel propellants for rockets.

However, researchers aren't permitted to discuss what practical military applications may come from this research.

[mirandapriestly]

46. In the simulation, it took 12 seconds for a 30 story building

I wonder if that is how long it will actually take. Didn't the world trade center fall in 10 seconds at 110 floors? That's even faster than a controlled demolition if 12 seconds is accurate.

[Kevin Fenton]

48. Yes and no

It took both towers more than 10 seconds to fall - probably around 15-18 seconds.

911research has a good piece on this here:
http://www.911research.com/wtc/analysis/collapses/freefall.html

Controlled demolitions are usually (maybe always) slower than this.

[mirandapriestly]

69. so what does that indicate to you?

to me it indicates wtc was controlled demolition PLUS bombs, fires, etc...

[LARED]

53. Hey Taxloss

Thanks for your efforts. It's appreciated by many.

[DoYouEverWonder]

56. It's a vast and complicated operation

Only if you're worried about meeting EPA standards for asbestos removal and the removal of other hazards and materials that can be recycled.

If you don't give a shit it doesn't take that long at all. Especially if you have the pResident's brother in charge of security and someone willing to shut down the electric in both towers on the weekend before the attack so that your team can work without interference.

[Maven]

60. Self-delete

[mirandapriestly]

78. Here is the actual demolition!!

http://www.dfw.com/multimedia/dfw/news/archive/0318implosion1/index.html

it actually tilts a bit to the side, but it looks the same as wtc7. Also you can see the detonation flashes! I wonder if that is the same as the lights attributed to lasers. It definitely looks like the lights in the BodyAtomic video.
toward the end of the video you can see the jets (squibs) lines up near the top, looking very similar to what has been pointed out at the wtc's. Lots of flashes , too.

[Taxloss]

86. So cool. I love those films.

at 00:47 you get a visible explosive shockwave - vibration of a fixed-point camera. Nothing like that at the WTC.

[mirandapriestly]

94. Here is a discussion on shockwaves

with some evidence to the contrary.

http://letsroll911.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=887


hmm, I wonder how that crafty al qaeda got that helicopter in the video to vibrate from so many yards away..

[beam me up scottie]

105. Nice website.

I especially enjoyed the pop-ups and the "answers" in this statement:

- Why was this done?


There are many reasons, because there are many groups behind the sept 11, 2001 crime .
The main groups are:
A – The bankers who are really the Illuminati with the idea of New World Order supported by oil companies.
B – The new religion ( Christian-Jew ) developed in USA with about 60 millions American followers who have some sort of believing which consist to build the State of Israel ( The Whole middle–east , Palestine , Lebanon , Syria , Iraq ), and to wait for the Messiah to come !!!
C – The FEAR of Islam!!!!
All governments of the whole world , specially Europe, United States, and even many Islamic countries are afraid of the True Islam Teaching ( This word should be clarified in its real meaning to understand why they are afraid from a simple teaching. Yes!! is very simple and consist in few words, freedom of belief in GOD, equality of people, and self-control

Remind me to bring a can of Raid and some disinfectant the next time I go there.

[mirandapriestly]

107. IOW, you can't refute the information..nt

[beam me up scottie]

109. I don't need to, they have no credibility.

Thanks for proving my assertion that many conspiroids will get into bed with anything as long as they can get info from them to support their agenda.

[salvorhardin]

108. Sort of reminds you of Nature's Harmonic Simultaneous 4-Day Time Cube...

...in the way it reads, doesn't it? But with extra hate. ;-)

You were educated to live an evil lie - and your heirs will suffer hell for your stupidity. The entity you seek is death. Educators teach assumed math, but are too damn dumb, stupid and evil to know that until Word is cornered, Math is fictitious. Academic/Religious Word is a fictitious Trojan Horse and the most efficient form of human enslavement ever concocted by "Singularity Brotherhood of Bastardism". I INVOKE a CURSE upon the educators that their students will awake from their academic induced stupor & seek revenge.
http://www.timecube.com

[beam me up scottie]

110. It DOES remind me of Timecube guy!

Now that you mention it.

[mirandapriestly]

106. Witness reports shockwave at Pentagon

Witnesses in the Pentagon, mostly military men, describe a shockwave and a blast; only explosives give a shockwave; there is no shockwave from a crash and fire:

Air Force Lt. Col. Marc Abshire, 40, a speechwriter for Air Force Secretary James Roche, was working on several speeches this morning when he felt the blast of the explosion at the Pentagon. His office is on the D ring, near the eighth corridor, he said. "It shot me back in my chair. There was a huge blast. I could feel the air shock wave of it," Abshire said. "I didn't know exactly what it was. It didn't rumble. It was more of a direct smack. WP
http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonAttackWitnessesBlast.shtml

[DemInDistress]

123. the smell of cordite was heavy in the air at the pentagon...

shouldn't they have smelled "jet fuel" ?? There is a video of flashes coming from inside the pentagon that appear to be blasts. Check out this page.. http://www.terrorize.dk/911/pentagon4/
and this..

[mirandapriestly]

111. Shockwave in helicopter

http://thewebfairy.com/911/shockwave/

you can do an ad hominem attack of the web site like your friend with the original name, but the video is from a news show and has nothing to do with the web site

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4563604978641682920&q=9%2F11+eyewitness+

the above is a great video of a guy who caught the whole thing from across the river in NJ. You can hear the explosions and watch the demol..., I mean collapse. He did a digital sound wave analysis which is in the video as well.

[beam me up scottie]

112. The fact that you accuse others of ad hominem attacks while attacking

me in the same sentence is priceless.

[mirandapriestly]

113. You need to look up the definition of ad hominem

it's when you attack a person rather than the substance of what they are saying. There is no substance to anything you say , so how can I be making an ad hominem attack? You are just coming here to pick fights. BTW, what do you think is "credible"? The corporate media? I decide for myself what is credible according to the information they use. The article has a video from a news source, a seismology graph from Columbia University & thermal photography, but I doubt you got that far, because the author didn't have "name brand" recognition to you.

[beam me up scottie]

114. I need to look up the definition?

:rofl:

All I have to do is read your posts:

There is no substance to anything you say , so how can I be making an ad hominem attack? You are just coming here to pick fights.

You're hysterical!

[Kevin Fenton]

117. Nothing like that at the WTC?

If you go here again:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change
and start the video at 52:59. You will see shots of the North Tower taken with a fixed-point camera that vibrates just before the collapse starts. Happy now?

[DemInDistress]

116. you talk about mindset...surely you jest?

The WTC was NOT destroyed by controlled demolition. <----- thats you !!! this is me ----------->
911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB..
I noticed you danced around several questions in my last reply. why? too tough to answer? remember my friend
there are 2 distinct possibilites..
1. osama and 19 arabs did it or
2. our government and larry silverstein did it
THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND UNLESS ONE DOESN'T CARE !!

I have more reason to believe #2 is correct. please get back to me with those answers. SEE POST #41

thanks

[Anarcho-Socialist]

128. FSM destroyed WTC due to decline in number of pirates

The FSM is already taking revenge on humanity via global warming for the decline of pirates. FSM has the motive and the power to pull off the atrocity.



This is only theory which cannot be DISPROVED.

You either believe 9/11 was carried out by ALIENS who disguised their hoverships as planes and used invisible laser weaponry to DESTROY the WTC

OR

You believe that the FSM brought down the WTC with His noodley appendage.

There is NO in-between!!

[salvorhardin]

136. Clearly

The red question marks are in league with the white plastic chairs.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

139. You're just another shill for the msm

The chairs are produced by the NWO illuminati containing toxic chemicals to poison our brains to stop us uncovering the truth about Mossad's neutronic weapons causing the Asian Tsunami.

The FSM will not help until there are more PIRATES.

[salvorhardin]

140. You've seen through my clever misdirection

Now I'll have to activate the black helicopters. *sigh* And we're so overbudget this month already. Hold still a minute while we triangulate on your location...

[WoodrowFan]

142. dagnabit SH

I keep telling you, they're not black, they're a nice midnight blue!!! They blend in so we can shoot the laser beams at tall buildings that look like 757s! (the lasers, not the buildings. The buildings look like buildings!)

[salvorhardin]

143. My bad

I forgot to put my eyebrows on.

[beam me up scottie]

144. What about the gnomes???

I keep telling you guys, the GNOMES are in on it.

I suppose you expect me to believe the chairs are smart enough to pull this off on their own.

And no, I AM NOT A WHITE PLASTIC CHAIR BIGOT!!!

YOU'RE the bigots for thinking the gnomes are so innocent.

[salvorhardin]

145. Pshaw dudette

You're a gnomist and gnow it!

[beam me up scottie]

146. AS is right, you're a government shill.

That will teach you to disagree with me.

You think I post here so people can question my reasoning?

[salvorhardin]

147. Damn you BMUS!

You'll PAY to know what you really think.

[beam me up scottie]

148. You just can't handle the

truthiness!

[salvorhardin]

149. 4 out of 5 dentists

Recommend Truthiness(TM) for their patients who chew gum. Can your corporate western medicine offer results like that?

Oh wait... what forum am I in again?

[Anarcho-Socialist]

153. sounds like youre enjoying your job working for the msm!!

The propaganda wing of Bilderberg. You don't want to know the truth... fine, when the reptoids come for you there will be no one left to speak up for you.

[seatnineb]

155. Like the 3 "gnomes" who were on the roof of the van doin' a video........

.......of the WTC whilst all shit was breakin' loose.

Oh yeah!

I forgot..they were Israelis.

The men were taking video or photos of themselves with the World Trade Center burning in the background, she said. What struck Maria were the expressions on the men's faces.they were like happy, you know … They didn't look shocked to me.I thought it was very strange," she said.

http://www.angelfire.com/az3/nfold/whitevan.html





So tell me ,Beam,......why were these Israelis happy?

[Anarcho-Socialist]

158. They were happy because...

they had been having conjugal relations with reptoids in their van in order to breed a hybrid race which will rule the earth. You shouldn't believe the msm lies.

[seatnineb]

159. I'll let one of the "happy" Israelis do the talking................

In the words of Paul Kurtzberg:
"People were spitting on us from the street...they were passing with the cars and spitting on us because they thought that we were the Arabs...they were looking for someone to blame.

9/11 Conspiracies.
Channel 4(UK)
TV documentary.
9/9/04.

Strange.....if you see the documentary ,Kurtzberg looks nothing like an Arab.

Yet in his own words.....he says that people nearby mistook him and his Israeli friends for Arabs....

Oh well......... maybe it was their "celebratory/happy" behavior which incited people's wrath......

[Anarcho-Socialist]

162. You shouldn't believe the msm agenda

Channel 4 was established by the British government. The head of government is Tony BLAIR who is well-known Bilderberg Illuminati, and soon-to-be member of the Carlyle Group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptoid

[seatnineb]

165. Yeah........I know Channel4 9/11 docus are full of shit!

Especially when they interview the happy Israelis.......but NEVER ask them WHY they were happy

In the words of Yaron Shmuel....one of the happy Isrealis:

One of the neighbours give a call to one of the feds and tell there is a van with 5 Arab people...as you see ...I am blond and blue eyes...and they tell there is a bomb in a white van...get the number...5 Arab people ...and they are on their way to Manhatten to make a suicide."

"(police ask)where is the bombs...where did you want to do the suicide....and(Laughing) and I don't know nothing about what you say."

"There is a better view from a building in Jersey that is up a hill ....straight line to the WTC..we decided to go up there ...it is like to 2-3 minutes from the office...stand over there and take some pictures....everyone wants pictures like this in their camera."

"They(police/Feds) ask "did you know the terrorist...did you know know where they flew from...did you know what they were supposed to do"...the answer all the time is no...I don't even know what you are talking about."

"The story that the Feds built is a very good story...when you hear the story.....you start to believe it inside...O.K maybe I am a spy....I assure you I am not....but the story is so good....so maybe I am!"

Channel4
9/11 Conspiracy Theories
9/9/04
(UK)

[beam me up scottie]

160. Wow, you're really hung up on those Israelis, aren't you?

It is incomprehensible to me how so many sheep can be fooled by the reichwing anti-semitism spouted by Bert.

Did you not see this picture ???




Keep believing the msm lies, you'll be sorry when the truthiness comes out!

[seatnineb]

164. In fact New Yorkers were hung up on these happy Israelis!

So are you implying that the following witness is "anti-semitic"?


"Maria"
"I grab my binoculars and I am trying to look at the Twin Towers....but what gets my attention...down there is I see this van...I see 3 guys on top of the van...they seem to be taking a movie.....they were like happy...they are laughing.....they did not look shocked to me."

9/11 Conspiracy theories
Channel4
9/9/04.

[stickdog]

150. Why did they go to all that work when they could have just crashed

a plane into it (or even simply set a few small fires) and waited about an hour or so for it to collapse in its own footprint?

[Grateful for Hope]

154. LOL!!

Good question!

[mirandapriestly]

163. That is priceless

why can't I ever think of stuff like that? Perfect response to a not too sharp OP. I mean what does one even say? good for you.

[Make7]

166. Maybe...

... they were trying to avoid...





... damaging the other buidings in the area.

- Make7