# 9/11 an inside job (1 Viewer)

#### Riet

##### Tomcat Pilot
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Really? Because maths seems to tell me that collapsing things generally fall with acceleration due to gravity.

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Exactly. Because it was a controlled demolition!!!!!

##### New Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

You are a complete fucking moron.
0.001% of a population is not a holocaust.
The West Bank is just the beginning. Think of it as the prequel. I'm surprised the Israelis haven't yet seen in the Gazans an exploitable (and disposable) labour force. If you're going to kill them, you might as well go about it more efficiently.

I don't know what they've got stamped on the underside of your Zionist Starbucks lid, but I daresay 0.001% is a tad hyperbolic.

#### moll.

##### Learn to science.
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

The West Bank is just the beginning. Think of it as the prequel. I'm surprised the Israelis haven't yet seen in the Gazans an exploitable (and disposable) labour force. If you're going to kill them, you might as well go about it more efficiently.

I don't know what they've got stamped on the underside of your Zionist Starbucks lid, but I daresay 0.001% is a tad hyperbolic.
West Bank is the beginning of what? Shit all has happened in the West Bank.
Are you confused or just a little slow?

#### Riet

##### Tomcat Pilot
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Exactly. Because it was a controlled demolition!!!!!
When one floor falls its collision not only affects the one immediately below it but also the force transfers through the whole building.

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Your missing the point that the way the WTC collapsed is exactly like a controlled demolition. The maths has been made to fit the lies. Watch the way a building collapses when controlled demolition occurs. Also large amounts of thermate was found.

'
Thermate is a variation of thermite and is an incendiary pyrotechnic composition that can generate short bursts of exceedingly high temperatures focused on a small area for a short period of time. It is used primarily in incendiary grenades.
The main chemical reaction in thermate is the same as in thermite: an aluminothermic reaction between powdered aluminum and a metal oxide. In addition to thermite, thermate also contains sulfur and sometimes barium nitrate, both of which increase its thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature[citation needed]. Various mixtures of these compounds can be called thermate, but, to avoid confusion with Thermate-TH3, one can refer to them as thermite variants or analogs. The composition by weight of Thermate-TH3 (in military use) is 68.7% thermite, 29.0% barium nitrate, 2.0% sulfur and 0.3% binder (such as PBAN). As both thermite and thermate are notoriously difficult to ignite, initiating the reaction normally requires trained human supervision and sometimes persistent effort.
Because thermate burns at higher temperatures than ordinary thermite[citation needed], it has useful military applications in cutting through tank armor or other hardened military vehicles or bunkers. As with thermite, thermate's ability to burn without an external supply of oxygen renders it useful for underwater demolition.
Because they are not intended to be thrown, thermate incendiary grenades generally have a shorter delay fuse than other grenades e.g. two seconds.'

#### moll.

##### Learn to science.
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

You crazy Zionists and your "maths". Why not just use letters to convey a point, people!

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Schroedinger: I didn't think you'd go to that level.

We were having a fantastic discussion and you say something stupid like that.

#### Riet

##### Tomcat Pilot
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Thermite isn't used in controlled demolition, high explosive is. Infact you've pretty much shut down your whole argument, if thermite/thermate was used to weaken the buildings it would have been a slow collapse.

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

The fact that it was found there is suspicious as is. Read the article and look what it is used for. Thermite would not be the only component in the controlled demolition either.

And thermite WAS used in THIS controlled demolition.

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Okay. Sorry. (I didn't see that and wtf is he on about)

#### Riet

##### Tomcat Pilot
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

The fact that it was found there is suspicious as is. Read the article and look what it is used for. Thermite would not be the only component in the controlled demolition either.

And thermite WAS used in THIS controlled demolition.
What was the thermite for? How would the government possibly hide tonnes and tonnes of nitroglycerin residue? The whole of manhatten would be covered in it.

#### Riet

##### Tomcat Pilot
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Also, lol.

As both thermite and thermate are notoriously difficult to ignite, initiating the reaction normally requires trained human supervision and sometimes persistent effort.

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

The way it was pulled off is genius. There is no doubt about it. The chemistry involved would be extremely complex and powerful.

The total disintegration of every piece of concrete in the twin towers means that the official version of how they came down can only be described as either a miracle or a lie.

"You have two hundred and ten story office buildings. You don't find a desk. You don't find a chair. You don't find a telephone, a computer. The biggest piece of a telephone I found was about half of a keypad and it was about this big [the size of a post-it]."

--Joe Casaliggi, Engine 7

"Watch both buildings collapsing straight down, directly into the path of most resistance - which is all the floors and all the mass of the building itself."

* * *​

"In order for the floor to fall down, thousands of [metal] joints would have to break simultaneously. And then if you look at the speed with which this came down - less than 10 seconds - you blink your eye and thousands of joints have popped, somehow. The only way you can explain that is with explosives."

--Eric Hufschmid, Metal Cutting Expert

"This was the South Tower. This was 104, 106 stories, all of it - this is what is left. Up there was the North Tower. And you look and you see - there's no concrete. There's very little concrete. All you see is aluminum and steel.

--George Pataki, Governor of New York

#### Riet

##### Tomcat Pilot
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Okay, I'll play devils advocate. It was a controlled demolition. TNT was used to destroy the building's integrity. WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH MAKING CONCRETE DISSAPPEAR?

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

1. The architects of the World Trade Center designed the buildings to absorb the impact of a crashing jetliner because that was an obvious structural design imperative in Manhattan. The designers of the buildings always confidently maintained that they would remain structurally secure from collapse under those circumstances.
FRANK A. DeMARTINI, MANAGER, WTC CONSTRUCTION & PROJECT MANAGEMENT has testified to the fact that the buildings at the World Trade Center should have been able to sustain multiple jumbo jet impacts without threatening the structural integrity of the buildings’ steel-reinforced frames:
“I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like mosquito-netting on your screen door—this intense grid. And the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.”
Detailed structural analysis of the Twin Towers determined that:
“The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner [Boeing 707-DC 8] traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.“
As noted by John Skilling, the engineer responsible for designing the World Trade Center, the buildings would withstand a major crash and the ensuing fires:
“Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the jet fuel would dump into the building. (But) the building structure would still be there.”

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

Each tower contained:
• Over 90,000 tons of concrete;
• 47 Massive Steel Core Columns and
• 240 Steel Perimeter Columns welded together and connected by hundreds of steel joints, perpendicular cross trusses, thousands of large steel bolts and concrete-filled steel floor decking at each floor level;
• 100,000 Ton Heat Sink to absorb excess heat;
• Updated fireproofing and a fire control system designed to prevent “chimney effect” and suffocate fires by depriving them of oxygen.

'

To convey the extent of the structural integrity of the World Trade Center, the Engineering News Record reported that:
One “could cut away all the first story columns on one side of the building, and partway from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100 mph wind from any direction.”
2. No large steel-reinforced building anywhere in the world, at any time before or since 9/11, ever experienced full building collapse due to fire:
“Never before in the history of the world has a steel building collapsed due to fire.”
The unique exception is 9/11 when 3 steel-reinforced skyscrapers with state-of-the-art fire-proofing at the World Trade Center allegedly collapsed due to fires, although the fires clearly never seriously threatened the structural integrity of the buildings.
In 1945 a U.S. Air Force B-25 bomber struck the Empire State Building, killing 14 people. However, neither the impact nor the ensuing fires caused significant damage to the building’s steel-reinforced frame and never threatened the structural integrity of the building.
3. Structural analysis conducted by MIT Engineer/Scientist Dr. Jeff King concludes:
a. The 47 massive steel core columns of each of the towers were adequately designed to withstand collapse.4. Structural steel begins to melt at 1510 degrees Celsius (2750 degrees Fahrenheit) and only if that temperature is maintained over a long period of time. Burning jet fuel can only reach temperatures of 1120 degrees Celsius and decreases in temperature if the fuel feeding it is being depleted (as was the case in the Twin Towers). Therefore, the temperature from the burning jet fuel (commonly cited as the reason for weakening the structure) could not possibly have melted the steel-reinforced columns.
The point becomes moot very quickly anyway because, as FEMA acknowledged, the level of dissipation of the jet fuel precluded its ability to burn long enough to even threaten structured steel:
b. “The Trade Center Towers and most modern buildings are heavily redundant.” Normally under the conditions that were present:
“The structure re-stabilizes and unless there is significant further damage, it doesn’t progress to a total collapse.”
c. “The columns could not have collapsed into themselves.” The official explanation of impact and fire damage causing complete loss of mechanical strength of structured steel and simultaneous core collapse is impossible.
d. Explosives are the only plausible mechanism to explain the high-speed slurry of the buildings.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) Report 403, World Trade Center Building Performance Study, 2002, clearly states that all jet fuel was totally consumed within the first few minutes after impact.
Scientist Kevin Ryan concludes that the rapid fuel consumption was an additional reason why it was impossible for the fires to have melted the structured steel:
“Including the fact that only 4,000 gallons of jet fuel were available to feed the fires in the impact zone and that was gone in a flash-fire in 5 minutes.”'

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

The actual temperatures of the WTC fires were only 650 degrees Celsius (1200 degrees Fahrenheit) which is dramatically insufficient to melt steel. Thermite (the incendiary explosive of which there was evidence at Ground Zero), however, typically reaches 2500 degrees Celsius (4500 degrees Fahrenheit).
“The fire is the most misunderstood part of the WTC collapse. Even today, the media report (and many scientists believe) that the steel melted. It is argued that the jet fuel burns very hot, especially with so much fuel present. This is not true.
Part of the problem is that people (including engineers) often confuse temperature and heat. While they are related, they are not the same. Thermodynamically, the heat contained in a material is related to the temperature through the heat capacity and the density (or mass). Temperature is defined as an intensive property, meaning that it does not vary with the quantity of material, while the heat is an extensive property, which does vary with the amount of material. One way to distinguish the two is to note that if a second log is added to the fireplace, the temperature does not double; it stays roughly the same, but the size of the fire or the length of time the fire burns, or a combination of the two, doubles. Thus, the fact that there were 90,000 L of jet fuel on a few floors of the WTC does not mean that this was an unusually hot fire. The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel.” (Eager & Musso, 2001)
Therefore, as many scientists, engineers and architects have observed, under the conditions presented there simply was not enough energy available for “crushing 80,000 tons of structural steel below” or for the “mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete” of each tower into fine dust.

#### prime-factor

##### Member
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

I could go on and on. The evidence is UNDENIABLE. You guys are intelligent, articulated people. You can see that something here is EXTREMELY suspicious to say the least!.

#### Riet

##### Tomcat Pilot
Re: Israel–Gaza conflict

1. The architects of the World Trade Center designed the buildings to absorb the impact of a crashing jetliner because that was an obvious structural design imperative in Manhattan. The designers of the buildings always confidently maintained that they would remain structurally secure from collapse under those circumstances.
FRANK A. DeMARTINI, MANAGER, WTC CONSTRUCTION & PROJECT MANAGEMENT has testified to the fact that the buildings at the World Trade Center should have been able to sustain multiple jumbo jet impacts without threatening the structural integrity of the buildings’ steel-reinforced frames:
“I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like mosquito-netting on your screen door—this intense grid. And the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.”
Detailed structural analysis of the Twin Towers determined that:
“The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner [Boeing 707-DC 8] traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.
As noted by John Skilling, the engineer responsible for designing the World Trade Center, the buildings would withstand a major crash and the ensuing fires:
“Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the jet fuel would dump into the building. (But) the building structure would still be there.”
Architect, LOL
Who said that? When I searched it it only showed up in 9/11 truth bullshit.
Exactly what I was going to get at, the fires are what made it collapse, not the crash.

I expect you're going to tell me kerosene can't melt steel though?

Bahahahhaa, sweet I didn't even have to wait. Go get two pairs of pliers and a coathanger.