straightUp Loc: California

No, it's not a fact... Nor is the assumption that al Qaeda did it. What we DO know for a fact is that all of the hijackers were Saudi nationals and there is a lot of evidence to suggest the t***h has not been entirely revealed.


Have you READ the Patriot Act? It's not just 700 pages of law... there's a whole network of previous laws being referenced, modified or repealed.

Here's an excerpt from an article I wrote back in 2005 about the Patriot Act...


Let’s look at section 505: “Miscellaneous National Security Authorities” which has three sub-sections, each one attacking a separate law. So just to understand Section 505, you have to read and understand three additional laws.

** sub-section “a” affects the Telephone Toll and T***sactional Records.–Section 2709(b) of title 18, United States Code.

** sub-section “b” (Financial Records) affects Section 1114(a)(5)(A) of the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3414(a)(5)(A))

** sub-section “c” (Consumer Reports) affects Section 624 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681u)


These other provisions were signed into law to help protect the American right to privacy and fair treatment over the course of several decades and they were repealed and/or disabled by the Patriot Act which was introduced to the House on October 23rd. Just 42 days after the attack.

I'm sorry, but I'm calling BS on this one. If the Patriot Act didn't exist until after 9/11 it was only the label we put on it... The contents of that act were I'm sure, developed over a much longer period of time and seems to reflect the long-standing Republican agenda of expanding executive power.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

The central theme of the 9/11 conspiracy theories is that the WTC towers and WTC7 were brought down by controlled demolition. The only way they can justify that argument is to claim the entire mass of the buildings accelerated to free fall speed. IOW, for the entire building mass to achieve free fall speed, a sequence of explosive detonations were necessary to destroy the support structures during each stage of the collapse.

A thorough analysis of the visual records (videos) of the collapses proves otherwise. The collapsing mass encountered resistance from the floors below, consequently, the collapse progressed at a constant 8 floors per second down through the structure, with acceleration at or very near ZERO.

Only the debris ejected away from the building's footprint accelerated toward free fall speed.

Moreover, something 9/11 t***hers have never been able to incorporate into their theories. They tried but failed miserably to find a rational ("scientific") explanation for why the structural failures that precipitated the collapses occurred precisely where damage from aircraft impacts was the greatest and the fire temps were hottest.

The t***hers tell us that thermite cutting charges were used to severe the support columns in the impact zones to initiate the collapse. In order to rationalize such a ludicrous idea, the t***hers focused on videos showing molten metal pouring from a single window near the north east corner of the 80th floor of the South Tower. More on that in a minute.

T***hers claim this phenomenon was evidence of a thermite cutting charge in the process of cutting core support columns.

There are so many errors in these assumptions I hardly know where to begin.
But I'll try.

First of all, for a thermite cutting charge to cut a steel beam or column, it must be bolted directly to the steel itself. This would necessitate direct access to the column, which means the walls, A/C ducts, elevator shaft and stairwell walls, electrical and cable conduit, plumbing and pipes, or any other interior structure blocking access to the column would have to be removed. IOW, the "installers" would have had to cut an access using power tools and gas cutting torches. Then the installation of the thermite charge would require drilling holes in the column in order to bolt it on.
Heavy steel, big drill.

Secondly, the molten metal pouring from the window in the South Tower is the only place in the entire WTC complex where this phenomenon is seen. Nowhere else In the thousands of videos of the tower collapses do we see molten metal pouring from windows. And, the assumption that this single shower of molten metal is evidence that themite cutting charges were used throughout the buildings to cut the columns falls flat on its face. For many reasons.

The "fountain of molten metal" we see pouring from the window on the 80th floor was 70 feet from the nearest core support column, separated by the mass of aircraft and building wreckage compressed into that corner of the tower.
When confronted with that fact, some t***hers changed their story and claimed the charge was cutting a perimeter column. This ridiculous claim is not based on science, logic, reason, or even common sense.

The perimeter columns in the area of that window were already either severely damaged or severed. And, cutting one or two or three perimeter columns could not possibly precipitate a collapse. Not with the heavy core columns still holding.

Brings us to the big questions. The controlled demolition scenario vs the thermodynamics of heat weakened steel.

There is no denying that both of the towers experienced structural failure in the aircraft impact zones and there is where the collapse began.

Had explosives or thermite charges been installed to precipitate a collapse, referring specifically to the point of collapse initiation in the impact zones, these devices and the circuitry necessary would have either been destroyed, activated, or detonated at the moment the jet slammed into the building and exploded.

Next question. T***hers claim the buildings were r****d for controlled demolition, therefore, a trigger man (or trigger men) with a triggering device had to set off the charges, either by a radio t***smission or direct wired circuits. The trigger man would have had to have eyes on and be able to select which charges to detonate in order for the collapse to begin just where the aircraft damage and fires were heaviest.

Assuming the demolition charges survived the aircraft impact and fires, why then did the trigger man (or trigger men) wait for 56 minutes to bring down the South Tower and 102 minutes to bring down the North Tower? What possible reason could explain these delays?

Let's apply physics (science), engineering principles and common sense.

A 56 minute delay from aircraft impact to collapse initiation in the South Tower is very near half the 102 minute delay in the North Tower. 56 x 2 = 112. (The South Tower was struck 17 minutes after the strike on the North Tower)

Flight 11 crashed into the North Tower on a central axis 15 floors below the top of the tower, and Flight 175 crashed into the South Tower on a central axis 30 floors below the top of the tower. 15 is half of 30.

Each floor of the twin towers weighed 4550 tons - without including office contents.
4550 tons x 15 = 68,250 tons. 4550 tons x 30 = 136,500 tons. 68.250 x 2 = 136,500.

IOW, the reason the South Tower collapsed in approximately half the time it took for the North Tower to come down is because the building mass above the impact zone weighed twice that of the mass above the impact zone in the North Tower.

For nearly 20 years we have been challenging 9/11 conspiracy theorists to put up or shut up. None of them have credible scientific explanations for their claims. So, one more point, then I'll bail.

The detonation of a conventional explosive device does not destroy all the components of the device. In every investigation of a criminal act using conventional explosives, in addition to explosive residue, investigators always find parts and pieces and wiring or remnants of circuit boards or pieces of a detonator.

Had the twin towers been r****d for controlled demolition as the t***hers claim, a truckload of bomb parts would have been found in the rubble. Nothing of the sort was found, not one piece.

And the thermite argument is a dog that don't hunt. Aluminum and iron oxide were abundant in those towers before the attacks, the jet crashes added more aluminum and intense heat of the fires combined the two to form globules which were assumed by some to be proof that thermite charges were used.

No they weren't.

The top photo is of the NE face of the South Tower taken 6 minutes before the collapse. The sliver of bright light four windows from the left, just below the plume of white smoke, is the shower of molten metal. On the right, adjacent to the shower, is a blackened bulge in the perimeter wall. Further to the right is another blackened bulge in the wall. These two bulges coincide closely with the distance between the two engines on a Boeing 767-200, the jet that crashed into the tower.

I don't know which engine of the jet penetrated the perimeter wall and landed on a street some blocks north.
That's it for now.

East face of Tower 2. Note the mass of wreckage and collapsed floors. NE corner at far right.


South Tower seconds after collapse initiation.


Flight 175 crash. NE corner at center.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Seven and a half years before the attack on 9/11, in March, 1994, Osama bin Laden, a Saudi, became such a problem, king Fahd personally revoked his citizenship and kicked his ass out of the country.

15 of the terrorists were Saudis, but they were no longer citizens or "nationals". When they joined Al Qaeda in A-stan, the Saudis disowned them and they were not allowed to return home.

Mohammed Atta, the field commander of the 9/11 operation who flew Flight 11 into the North Tower, was an Egyptian.
Marwan al-Shehhi, who flew Flight 175 into the South Tower, was from the UAE.
Hani Hanjour, who flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon, was a Saudi.
Zaid Jarrah, who flew Flight 93, was Lebanese.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Good information, well presented.. great post Blade.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Thanks, perm, I take it you are not an Alex Jones fan either.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

No, not at all...

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

I've done one hell of a lot of research. 15 years of it, off and on. Research that included 9/11 conspiracies, but went far beyond and into the heart of Islamic terrorism.

What you are throwing out here is boilerplate 9/11 conspiracy junk, none of which is true.

I will take a minute to address a couple points, then we'll take a look at World Trade #7, the 47 story building that was just a block north of the North Tower.

"Are you denying physicists claims that the molten steel left in the craters of the towers could only be the result of thermite explosives?"

Yes, I deny that claim for the simple reason that molten steel in the craters were not the result of thermite explosives, but were the result of temperature increases in hot metals due to pressure. In this case several million tons of it.

BTW, those weren't physicists who made that claim, they were 9/11 t***hers' "science experts". And, thermite doesn't explode, it burns.

The temperature in a mass of hot metals increases proportionate to pressure. The masses of steel, aluminum, copper, brass, and other metals buried in the rubble were already heated to temps near 1800F - some of the lighter metals such as aluminum were already molten when the towers came down - and with several million tons of pressure bearing down on it, the temp increased exponentially.
Steel becomes molten at 2500F (1370C),
Aluminum at 1220F (660C).
Copper at 1983F (1084C),
Brass at 1810-1880F (990-1025C)


"The steel in those towers were tested to withstand 2000c and the fuel in those jets were only 350c"

2000 degrees centigrade is 3632 degrees Fahrenheit. 350C is 662F.
3632 degrees Fahrenheit is twice the highest temperature recorded anywhere in the twin towers. 1800F to 2000F max.
Industry standard. Structural steel begins to weaken at 572F (300C) and increases rapidly at 752F (400C). At 1020F (550C), steel retains just 60% of its strength. At 1200F, steel has lost 50% of its strength.

When heated along any portion, a steel beam will undergo thermal expansion.
A free standing beam, bearing no load, will expand longitudinally. Grow longer.
A vertical load bearing beam obviously cannot grow in length, instead it warps and buckles.

About the burning jet fuel.

The most unscientific erroneous excuse 9/11 t***hers make to rationalize a controlled demolition is their assertion,

"Burning jet fuel cannot melt steel!"

Well, no s**t Sherlock.

Jet A burns at around 1400F (760C). And it burns fast.
The vaporized fuel resulting from the crashes expanded and burned for less than 10 seconds.
However, the entire fuel load in the jets did not burn in the fireballs. Some volume of it remained liquid.
People in the towers reported jet fuel running down the elevator shafts and stairwells. Firefighters and others in the ground floor lobbies reported the smell of Jet fuel.

Whether intentional or just out of ignorance, the most egregious, unforgivable, error in the t***hers' assertion that burning jet fuel cannot melt steel, was no reference to the many tons of combustibles present in the offices - paper, cardboard, wood, plastics, rubber, fabrics, oils, lubricants, alcohol, propane, butane - People.

After all, we watched and we saw fires burning in the towers long after the fireballs were history.
And, we watched the horrific spectacle of over 200 people trapped up there - most in the North Tower - choosing instant death rather than being roasted alive.

Fires in enclosed office spaces (or homes) can reach temperatures up to and including 1800F to 2000F, well above the temps where load bearing structural steel warps or buckles due to thermal expansion.

It was the heat, not a bomb, not a thermite, that caused the support columns to fail resulting in a progressive collapse.


"Have you ever researched the claim that the 'Islam' terrorists loved drinking and bar hopping and prostitutes?"

Yes, I have. Against the doctrines of their own religion, the terrorists were told to "blend in", to act "western", to behave without drawing suspicions. They certainly didn't "love" doing it, but they visited the titty bars, drank a few beers, smoked a cigar or two, and none of them paid a prostitute for sex.


WTC 7

The 9/11 t***hers invariably point to this building as the "smoking gun" that supposedly proves beyond a shadow of doubt that controlled demolitions had to be the cause of the collapse of not only building 7 itself, but also the two 110 story towers.

Their reasoning is the collapse of WTC7 bore all the earmarks of a conventional explosive demolition. IOW, blow out the support near the base of the building and you have the full weight of the building coming down rather than just some upper floors as occurred with the twin towers.

WTC7 was built above a ConEd substation. This required a unique design for foundational support. T***sverse trusses and cantilever beams were necessary to augment the strength of the vertical support columns. This unique structure extended up 7 floors above ground level, and was incorporated into the vertical support between the 22nd and 24th floors.



At 9:59am, the South Tower (Tower 2) collapsed. First building to go. And when it went, it severely disrupted the water supply for the entire WTC complex. This was not an issue until the North Tower came down.

At 10:28am, the North Tower (Tower 1) collapsed. And here is where it gets interesting.

700 feet above the roof of WTC7, heated steel sections and burning materials were ejected away from the collapsing mass. Some of this hot debris struck WTC 7 in a number of places. Some hit the roof, but most struck the south face.

Some hit he south face between Floor 44 and the roof;
Another put a large vertical gash near the center of the south face between Floors 24 and 41.
One large section of heated perimeter columns and remnants of floor trusses hit the southwest corner between floors 7 and 17. This was a deep gash through ten floors and included severe damage to the foundation supports.

This hot debris started fires in floors 6 through 10, 13 through 14, 19 through 22, and 29 through 30. And fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon.

Due to insufficient water supply fire fighting efforts at WTC7 were minimal.

At approximately 2:00 pm, firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest face near the corner of the building between the 10th and 13th floors. In order to determine the progress of the bulge, FDNY Chief Nigro had a crew take a t***sit sighting along the wall. The bulge was expanding outward. Chief Nigro was then certain the building was going to collapse and he ordered his crews to withdraw to a security perimeter.

Now, about the incredible spin 9/11 t***hers put on Silverstein's comments.

"Silverstein admitted on video he gave the order to pull Tower 2 down."
No, he didn't. Tower 2 was already down and Silverstein seemed confused when he talked to the chief on the phone.

The fire chief called Silverstein and told him his crews were unable to fight the fires due to lack of water and that the building appeared dangerously close to collapsing. Silverstein said, "'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it."

What did he mean by that?

Since only a few dedicated men in the intelligence agencies were convinced a major Al Qaeda attack was coming, yet had no idea when, where or how the attack would unfold, and were unable to convince the NSA, or anyone else in the administration, including president Bush, and since Larry Silverstein was not a government official of any sort, it stands to reason then that he had no clue an attack was coming.

I am reasonable certain, John O'Neiil or Richard Clarke, who couldn't even convince Condaleeza Rice or president Bush an attack was imminent, didn't throw up their hands and say, "to hell with it let's call Larry, maybe he can do something about it."

Sidebar: Big One.

Something happened early on in this Colossal 9/11 Conspiracy movement, the Jew h**ers moved in.

Oh yeah, the anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, anti-Z*****m, pro-Palestinian, pro-Islam bunch grabbed onto the attacks as if they were a gift from God. (which to the Jihadists they were)

Self-loathing Jews all over the world got into the act.

And, boy, did these wretched Jew h**ers work those conspiracies.
Oh, how the plot did thicken.

Even that Iranian Peckerwood Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced to the world 9/11 was an "inside job."

Larry Silverstein is Jew. The Perfect Patsy.
He owned some of those buildings, insured them, and Inshallah! he's gonna reap his just reward.

This astronomically complex 9/11 Conspiraxcy movement started out with just,
"Bush did it just to start some wars, man, score some oil, build the Bush Empire, beef up the New World Order."
All that crap.

When the Jew h**ers got hold of this, they stretched that baby into orbit.

If Larry Silverstein, and most everyone else, was clueless before the attacks, how in God's name could he devise a plan to demolish his buildings. Have them pre-r****d with boom boom and ready to blow on September 11th?
And, why let WTC7 burn all day?

Before the attacks on 9/11, the only people who knew when, where, and how the attacks would come and who would carry them out were those who did it.
Al Qaeda terrorists.
And, they got much more than they bargained for.

I know this, Al Qaeda is none too happy with these 9/11 conspiracy theorists and their entire convoluted movement,
they even sent a stern message to that Peckerwood Mahmoud, telling him to put a sock in it.

Islamic Jihadists take great p***e in what they do. For the glory of Allah, Peace be unto him, and tickets to paradise. Credit where credit is due is their complaint. Very important the glory of Allah and the blessed act of Shahhid are not blemished by a bunch of Infidel miscreants and malcontents floating all kinds of theories. Insulting Allah is a death sentence.

Cuda2020

LOL

Cuda2020

I have to agree with you, when I've watched explosive demolitions done, the building collapses from bottom up(for the most part), the towers collapsed from top down, one top floor collapsing on top of the next, building up on weight and speed and exponentially compressing the entire building into a pile of rubble.

Cuda2020

I agree.

whole2th

9-11 T***h was derailed by 9-11 T***h.

We were lied to about 9-11, period. End of debate. No one who knows anything about 9-11 can deny that.

THEY .... LIED ... ABOUT ... 9-11

Everybody who lies about 9-11 is an accessory to the 9-11 crimes.

https://odysee.com/ep408:7cf29ba8e2e2f3f104f9456974122d873833e4e6?src=embed

straightUp Loc: California

'Just got around to reading your post, Blade. You present a good argument here and I just want to applaud your efforts to bring facts and logic into the fray.

To be honest, I stopped caring one way or the other after several years of reading back and forth arguments for two basic reasons...

1. I am not a physicist and the level of discussion gets to where I feel like I need to be one to really know which side has the better argument. However, I don't really see much motive in the Bush doctrine to justify 100% destruction of the WTC. I think the bewilderment of the simultaneous hijacking of several commercial flights and consequential destruction of major targets was more than enough.

2. I'm much more focused on how to prevent this kind of thing from happening again and I find the dispute over whether or not the buildings collapsed because of the crash or because of a covert demolition job doesn't really bring much to bear on the issue of how to prevent another such attack.

Even if the demolition factor was proven, we still wouldn't know who did it or why. We can't just assume it was the Bush Administration.

If the object is to incriminate the Bush Administration, there is much more to consider such as the Phoenix Memo etc... The fact that for the first time after several attempts during previous administrations, the terrorists actually succeeded in hitting the WTC indicates the possibility that the attacks may have been "permitted" in much the same way that some folks suggest Perl Harbor was "permitted". You wouldn't need to prove that a demolition was involved to charge Bush for permitting an attack by suicide hijackers.

But even this would be hard to prove and once again, it doesn't really get us any closer to WHY we were attacked in the first place.

I know this is where we differ, Blade, but I think we really need to pay attention to the targets and what they represent. Those Saudi terrorists were found to be Muslim extremists, that much we know. And I agree with you that those are some crazy, messed-up people. I also agree that jihad is a big part of what they are doing. Muslims don't sacrifice their lives without a jihad to connect it to. They are not evil people. Evil people do things that they know are wrong. These people are utterly convinced that they are true heroes... In the eyes of God, no less.

They are the fodder.

People like bin Laden are the masterminds and this is what makes the U.S.A. a target of wh**ever devices they make of their fodder.

It's not the first time Americans have been the target of suicide pilots. But in retrospect we understand it wasn't the Japanese belief systems that caused the Kamikaze attacks in WW2, it was the Japanese command that TOLD them to do it.

As you probably know, bin Laden (being the only example everyone knows) came from a world of money and trade with wealthy Americans. I don't know enough about him (or care) to know what happened along the way, but he eventually got "holy"... and he took a big side step to the right.

So, here's what I'm referring to, when I say "to the right"...

For some reason, bin Laden was strongly opposed to the presence of Americans in the Muslim world. I don't know if that was influenced by Islamic Fundamentalism or if he was leveraging it, but he made the association clear... Indeed, Islam demands that any community not be controlled by outside influences and that's exactly what the Americans in Saudi Arabia were. It's this strong opposition to outside influences that make it a rightward motion. The affluence of the monarchy riding on oil is a very leftward handshake with foreigners.

Saudi Arabia is an extreme dichotomy between the downtrodden people locked in a very religious-conservative tradition and a few party animals roaming the neoliberal world.

So... now we put the pieces together...

Some guy from the party yacht, infuriated with everyone there, decided to leverage the delusions of desperate people in the desert to hit the epicenter of the neoliberal world - the World Trade Center in NYC.

I don't mean to make this sound like a Stan Lee comic strip... Obviously, there's more to it than that. But the point I am trying to get to circles back to the original post...

If Big Oil wasn't trying to control Saudi Arabia though it's tyranny, it's *highly* unlikely that the attacks on 9/11 would ever have happened.

Someone brought up the Israeli factor and it's true that our policy on Israel was a self-stated reason for bin Laden's actions. I submit that Z*****m in the Levant makes for better propaganda. But this isn't to say our support for Israel's Z*****t policies isn't by itself a reason behind terrorist attacks on western targets. Indeed, the U.S., the U.K., France, Russia.., they have all trespassed on these predominately Muslim territories in forceful ways. The WTC in NYC just happens to be a symbolic representation (and functional hub) for all of them.

I just think we need to take some responsibility for what happened to us. If we don't, it's likely to happen again.

whole2th

Saudi royals have a Jewish bloodline.

Israel attacked the USS Liberty.

OBL died in December, 2001. https://www.foxnews.com/story/report-bin-laden-already-dead

The demolitions are proven and Jewish (Z*****t)-dominated mass media, Hollywood and Congress continue the cover-up.

Seven of the named hijackers turned up alive within months of 9-11.

Long, wandering narratives don't substitute for the t***h.

Cuda2020

Exactly right, taking responsibility of our hand into it, actually empowers us, we have to acknowledge that, in order to enable the positive changes we need to make for our future.

martsiva

Why? Besides the un-Constitutional Patriot Act they used this attack as a justification for their 'War on Terror' where they invaded countries that had vast natural resources and no involvement in 911!! The invasion of Iraq should be a big eye opener since the war there was based on a lie and that cost the lives of over 4,000 of American soldiers! How can anyone miss that?? Don`t forget that Wes Clark let people know a list was made up of countries they wanted to take over even before the attacks - Iraq - Lebanon - Syria - Sudan - Somalia - and Iran! That was one of the biggest 'whys'!!