Does anyone else back up William Rodriguez's story?

Gravy said:
What's the next step, Swing? What are you going to do with this theory of yours? Second, is there anything that can make you believe that the damage on the lower levels was caused by jet fuel and falling elevators?
Click to expand...
Well yes there are, unlike 2 people who have commented they could be convinced there was a device in the basement when others take a religious approach to the topic:

1. I would like to see the possible route taken by the fuel that lead to the basement sub-levels.
2. I would like to see evidence in the North Tower that the elevators caused the damage and how that corresponds with the eyewitness accounts and descriptions in the basement of the North Tower.
3. Which elevator or elevators and what shafts were responsible for the damage?
4. Which of the three elevators caused the damage in the North Tower?
5. I would like to see the calculations associated with the energy necessary to account for the damage that the victims witnessed in comparison to the energy available.
6. It would have been nice if NIST would have used that big hole in the building as a source of oxygen when calculating the amount of fuel remaining in the structure. In my unprofessional opinion, I think this is a huge oversight.
7. I would like to see the placement of the victims in the basement in relation to the events and damaged they experienced.
8. I would like to see the evidence that NIST used to arrive at their conclusion.

RMackey, I assume this is the portion you were pointing to.
767's Couldn't Have Destroyed The Towers4
This argument supposes that the Evil Genius would know this ahead of time, and would thus have to have weakened the buildings or employed a secondary attack to finish them off -- because the towers did in fact fall, eventually.
Rubbish. A true Evil Genius would simply upgrade to 747's. Why not?
Click to expand...
This is a poor example to refute the hypothesis. How can anyone claim to know the mind and resources of an "evil Islamic genius" and his cohorts?
Upgrade the weapon of attack to refute the hypothesis? This is comical. Perhaps the evil genius already considered the greatest 'upgrade' available and found it to be too risky or unavailable .
Perhaps the EG does not have the operating knowledge or access to the greatest 'upgrade' available.
Trying to use logic to determine the mind and method of an evil genius is illogical itself.

In the scenario you just outlined, the airliners offer no advantages, and only risk -- in particular, the risk that someone might notice what a bizarrely complex plan they'd implemented.
Click to expand...
Yes, and various intel agencies did notice, correct? Hence the numerous warnings including George Tenet's presentation to Condi Rice?
Yes and the scenarios were worst case examples, especially if the hijacking was averted and the plane landed safely. Even this worst case scenario offers a psychological and 'lesson learned' advantage to the terrorists.
That of course makes you wonder, why would terrorists use such a risky method of attack in the form of planes in the first place.

because anyone who could implement such a plan would also be capable of a far more successful one.
Click to expand...
Of course there is no logical proof for this statement only assumption. The implementation of a one plan is different than the success rate of a different plan. To judge the success rate of the plan, you have to know the goal and objectives and the benefits.
What was the goal of 9/11? What were its objectives? How do the terrorists define success in relation to the 9/11 attacks?
And how did the terrorists benefit from its success if they considered it a success? I'm not aware if the terrorists have provided concrete answers to any of these success rate questions.
If the ultimate goal of Al-Q and OBL is the removal of forces from the Islamic holy lands and the Middle East in general as well as the elimination of material and financial support to the state of Israel and governments that are repressive to Muslims, then the 9/11 attacks were not successful at all. The attacks indeed had the opposite effect. So in regards to the success of one plan versus the capability of a far more successful one indeed is irrelevant to the discussion of an explosive device in the basement and/or in the towers in general.

No "Plan B" devices went off in the Pentagon. I wonder why.
No plane hit the Capitol building, yet no Plan B devices were set off there, or anywhere else in D.C. by the terrorists. I wonder why.
Click to expand...
Pentagon, Gravy? LOL! Yeah, Gravy, I wonder why there wasn't one at the Pentagon? Do you think they might have a little tougher time infiltrating the headquarters of the strongest military power in the world as opposed to a civilian target?
What terrorists claimed the Capitol building was a target on that day? Because anything else is sheer speculation and pointless in the point your trying to make. Again, your using yet another false analogy anyway. You may want to reexamine the site you posted an refresh your memory on what a false analogy is.

Beachnut, what does Jet fuel look like a ground level? Is it white? Is it clear? Is a dyed color? Please explain, because your completely ignoring the altitude issue in regards to fuel dumps and the white smoke below ground.

GravyA device that produces a kerosene fireball that burns people and doesn't cause structural damage?
Click to expand...
Interesting. You ignored the environmental destruction yet again and fail to demonstrate what shafts and the route the jet fuel and/or fireball took in your sarcastic comment. Your position is that it was a fireball or jet fuel or a combination of both, which is fine.
Nor have you demonstrated the required energy available nor the energy needed to cause the destruction in the basement areas.

Gravy, here are some more errors from you paper.
That empty elevator probably plummeted 14 floors into a pit on the 77th floor. Wertz and Lawrence evacuated safely down the stairs, as did 18 other people from the 91st floor.
Click to expand...
Not an error but is there any reason why you suspect the emergency breaks didn’t catch as they did in Arturo's account? Is there any reports of an elevator crashing on the 77th floor?

88th floor
“Roz”: ...an explosion of great magnitude blew off the entrance door through which I had just previously walked. It knocked us both down in her cubicle. http://www.servenyc.org/survivor_stories.htm
Dead Link, unable to verify the account.

87th floor: Jet fuel on floor
It was pandemonium and total confusion for the occupants and visitors on the 87th Floor. Bright white smoke was filling the hallways and liquid sparks were snaking along the floor – the jet fuel that had not exploded.
Carmen Griffith, who had been standing next to the elevator when the jet had hit, was engulfed by burning jet fuel that erupted through the elevator doors. Carmen was on fire, her skin peeling from her body.
Click to expand...

There is no documented eyewitness to this account in the source, only the author’s words. Not only that, the author is completely wrong about Carmen’s account about being next to the elevator when in fact she was in the elevator.
Why Gravy, are you using this paper as a source is beyond me when the simple facts are wrong and were not checked for accuracy when writing your paper.:mgduh
 
Last edited:
Swing Dangler said:
Beachnut, what does Jet fuel look like a ground level? Is it white? Is it clear? Is a dyed color? Please explain, because your completely ignoring the altitude issue in regards to fuel dumps and the white smoke below ground.
Click to expand...
Swing Dangler, what does water look like at ground level? Is it white? Is it clear? Is it a dyed color? Please explain, because you completely fail to accept the fact jet fuel can look like a white cloud, which can look like white smoke and smell like jet fuel.

Water is clear but it can be, fog = white smoke = water, or it can be a, cloud = white smoke = water. I will save you the time to think about water. You could answer you own question, I have told you, people have showed you, and you still fail to get it. If you can not get the tiny stuff right, you may have problems with the big stuff.

You know water vapor and jet fuel vapor can hide, and be clear too. It all depends. It is a mystery.

Did someone see white clouds and smell jet fuel on 9/11? How will you prove there was a giant bomb in the basement? Who did it? I give up on the fuel, you are not taking to learning very well. You lost, just accept it. I am sure, any post now, you will let loose the evidence for the basement bomb. Will it be this year? We have waited for 5 plus years, when will it come?
 
Experts and Jet Fuel

Alleged plot's damage would have been limited
Jet fuel doesn't explode easily, experts say, and fire would not have spread along airport pipelines.
By Megan Garvey, Times Staff Writer
June 3, 2007

The premise is right out of a disaster movie: Ignite the massive fuel tanks required to keep an international airport up and running each day, stand back, and watch a chain reaction of explosions throughout the labyrinth of pipelines running underneath the tarmac.

But aviation experts cautioned Saturday that the alleged plot targeting John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York would have faced many hurdles, not least of which is the fact that jet fuel does not easily explode.

"The level of catastrophe that may be created is much more limited than most people would expect," said Rafi Ron, former head of security at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport. "The fuel that we are talking about is mostly jet fuel, which, unlike the gasoline most people put into their cars, is not that susceptible to explosion."

That difficulty apparently concerned one of the alleged plotters — an engineer who, federal authorities said in their complaint, explained to his associates that the tanks at JFK would probably require two explosions to provide enough oxygen to ignite the fuel.

But even then, aviation security experts said, fire would not have spread through the pressurized pipelines that bring fuel out to airplanes parked at gates.

"The probability that an explosion would travel through the pipeline and destroy targets along the tarmac is almost nil," said Ron, now president of New Age Security Solutions in Rockville, Md. "The exception would be pipelines that are not in use and contain vapor."

Jet fuel is similar to kerosene and, unlike gasoline, requires very high temperatures to burn. Unless it is in vapor or mist form — which can occur in a plane crash — jet fuel does not explode.[/B] Additives raise the flashpoint of jet fuel, further reducing the likelihood that it will burn, experts said.
Click to expand...
Source: LA TIMES

Jet fuel is similar to kerosene, NOT kerosene.
So much for jet fuel exploding and causing the damage in the basement.
That leaves only jet fuel vapor or mist, which there is no proof that jet fuel vapor or mist was in the basement and white smoke could have been produced by many items burning in the building.
And again, in order to produce the vapor in white smoke form, the surface has to be heated enough prior to contact with the jet fuel in the first place.
However, this portion of the argument is pointless, as kerosene and jetfuel A are not the same thing. See below.
No plausible explanation of how this process was conducted in the North Tower to arrive at the necessary energy levels for destruction has been offered by NIST or by visitors to this thread. If Occam's Razor is a suitable counter-argument, then it should be easy to explain this vaporization/explosion process.

Notice that the article does not mention vapor or mist form which can occur after a plane crash but IN a plane crash and we saw that in the initial impact of the jet with the building.

More on the color of jet fuel and jet fuel vapor, take note that there is NO mention of the color of jetfuel A vapor however the color of jetfuelA in its liquid state is clear, not white:

Source: SINCLAIR
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET
SINCLAIR JP-8, JET A, TURBINE FUEL, AVIATION
FUEL MSDS NO. 62

PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
APPEARANCE/PHYSICAL STATE:
Liquid, Colorless
SPECIFIC GRAVITY (g/ml):
0.77-0.84
VAPOR DENSITY (air=1):
4.5
VAPOR PRESSURE:
<1 PSIA

ENGINEERING CONTROLS:
Provide ventilation sufficient to prevent exceeding recommended exposure limit or build-up of explosive concentrations of vapor
in air.

Considering there was a huge gaping hole in the tower, open air office space as part of the design, and elevator shafts and stairwells that extended various levels of the building that were not sealed in a vacuum, it appears the environment was not suitable to allow a build-up of explosive concentrations of vapor.

Which brings us to the explosive device or devices in the subbasement of the North Tower. If the device or devices of whatever nature were centered around the core to assist in the tower's destruction, one would expect the type of injuries suffered in the elevator as they were within the core itself.
A hazardous vapor concentration is present when a fuel vapor reaches a level known as the lower flammability limit (LFL) or lower explosive limit (LEL). These limits are usually expressed as a percentage by volume. Fuels below the LFL/LEL are considered too lean to burn. If the fuel vapor concentration exceeds the upper flammability limit or upper explosive limit, the fuel is considered too rich to burn. A fuel vapor concentration between these two limits is considered to be in its flammable range and will ignite and burn if exposed to an ignition source.
Click to expand...
Source: Boeing
NIST nor any visitor has not provided any data to my knowledge proving the EEL, and if they did it was eventually based upon the only available oxygen to determine the fuel remaining being in a single room.

Beachnut, tell me again how I've lost?
 
Last edited:
Experts and Jet Fuel

Beach-Swing Dangler, what does water look like at ground level? Is it white? Is it clear? Is it a dyed color? Please explain, because you completely fail to accept the fact jet fuel can look like a white cloud, which can look like white smoke and smell like jet fuel.
Click to expand...

No, I fail to accept your statement based upon the material data sheet listed below and simple fact. The data sheet referenced below states that JetFuelA is colorless, not white. When dumped at altitude it is under high pressure and forced through a very small opening. Why do you think it is white, when it begins clear? Simply the refraction of light by the liquid at altitude gives it the white color.
 
Swing,

I'm honestly quite confused as to why your story has changed so much.

Over on SLC you made the claim that the basement bomb was designed to somehow aid the collapse by weakening the core. Your claim, as I understood it, was that the black ops people of the US government were behind this.

Now you're claiming what? That it was an Al Qaeda back-up plan??? A back-up plan that was launched as the plane hit? A plan that didn't even do its job?

And I notice that you refuse to say who rigged up the towers themselves.

C'mon Swingy, you'll have to tell us sooner or later.
 
Swing Dangler said:
No, I fail to accept your statement based upon the material data sheet listed below and simple fact. The data sheet referenced below states that JetFuelA is colorless, not white. When dumped at altitude it is under high pressure and forced through a very small opening. Why do you think it is white, when it begins clear? Simply the refraction of light by the liquid at altitude gives it the white color.
Click to expand...
You mean like water?
Ah, but what about Water? Darn, you have still lost. Try again. I looked up the data sheet on water, it says it is clear too. I guess those clouds to day were not water. What about fog? What color would you say fog was? Looks white. Fuel cloud, looks white. I have said no more, or less.

I know jet fuel in a jar seems to be clear like water, and what do you know, it the sky it is white like water under certain conditions, sort of like water. Clear, in sky like a cloud. Wow. Still wrong, but you are saying the right things you just can not say you are wrong. Certain conditions will let you say you are wrong, like be humble. But jet fuel looks like a cloud under certain conditions. You once said it was white. I have to tell you jet fuel as you finally found out is clear, but like water it looks white when it is found under certain conditions, no it does not have to be trough some tiny hole, we used a 4 inch nozzle, not a tiny hole. Try again.

Under certain condition jet fuel appears like a white cloud. Several times people have shown you jet fuel in a white cloud and I have described first hand the white cloud jet fuel can be. I have done it my self, and witnessed it from my buddies jet. I have reports of white clouds of fuel leaking from my wing from a fighter next to me, he drove me crazy and scared my crew. The crew was worried about the wing integrity with the leak. We could not see the leak on our gages. But the F-15 could see a big cloud of fuel leaving our jet, from the wing (our vent system had flooded. White, like a cloud. Now I have told you first hand I have made jet fuel make a white cloud, my buddy did it right next to me, and a jet fighter witnessed it, feet away from my jet.

Try again. Say yes, I know jet fuel can exist in a state that appears like cloud or fog. Then you can say you learned something today. Truthers need to get some humble pie and eat it too.

To tell you the truth, if you waste this much time messing up jet fuel, how can anyone take your ideas seriously?

Beachnut, tell me again how I've lost?
Click to expand...
You seem to be in the 9/11 truth movement. That was an easy question.

Are you trying to say the big fire ball explosion we saw on 9/11 was not JET fuel? You do understand Jet fuel contains more energy than gasoline?
 
Last edited:
Beach, answer me this question and stop avoiding it, the jetfuelA which is of course different that the military grade jet fuel you are experienced with, was it white at altitude or on the ground or below the ground? And why are you trying to compare military grade jet fuel with passenger jetfuel, anyway?
When you watched or put the jet fuel into the airplanes tanks, was it white or clear?
Under certain condition jet fuel appears like a white cloud.
Click to expand...
Under what conditions, Beach? At altitude? I was shown how kerosene smoke machines can turn kerosene fuel white. On my own research, I've seen jetfuelA in white form at altitude as it was forced through a small nozzel under high pressure conditions, and even then it has something to do with the spectrum of light.

Beach, please explain why clouds or fog for that matter are white? Are they born white? Are they white like the background I'm typing in? I know the answer, I'm waiting to see how you will answer.

CHF, I think that the explosion in the basement was done to weaken the core in the attempt to help assist in the collapse. Whether it did or not, no one is really certain as we have no empirical evidence to examine and only the video footage of the day to rely upon.

I listed two possible suspects. I've already stated that I think individuals within the U.S. government assisted in this entire attack. I've also stated that American citizens have assisted in this attack. One citizen, although not involved with 9/11 to my knowledge, was assisting one of the possible suspects. I would suggest examining the 1993 attack and the FBI's involvement with that endeavor as a starting point for my suspicions.

Why would I try to argue sheer speculation at JREF, when only factually supported positions are accepted?
 
Swing Dangler said:
I listed two possible suspects. I've already stated that I think individuals within the U.S. government assisted in this entire attack. I've also stated that American citizens have assisted in this attack. One citizen, although not involved with 9/11 to my knowledge, was assisting one of the possible suspects. I would suggest examining the 1993 attack and the FBI's involvement with that endeavor as a starting point for my suspicions.
Click to expand...
I will ask you the same thing I ask all the CTists.

1. How would you like to be accused of complicity in mass murder with the same level of speculation and innuendo as you so easily accuse others? The darker side of me wishes you would become a victim of the someone like yourself, someone who anonymously accuses others of murder.

2. What are you going to do with your "evidence"? Are you going to hide behind the Internet and take pot shots and accuse innocent people of mass murder or are you going to be an adult and seek out the proper authorities to achieve justice?
Swing Dangler said:
Why would I try to argue sheer speculation at JREF, when only factually supported positions are accepted?
Click to expand...
Good question, why do you do it?
 
Last edited:
Speaking of sheer speculation, how could anybody base an opinion of something on sheer speculation? The reason JREF deals with positions based on fact is because that's the ONLY way to really be sure of something.

There are people out there who base their entire world view on speculation and on things they suspect to exist, and nothing more; they are no less 'sheeple' than anybody else.
 
Swing Dangler said:
CHF, I think that the explosion in the basement was done to weaken the core in the attempt to help assist in the collapse. Whether it did or not, no one is really certain as we have no empirical evidence to examine and only the video footage of the day to rely upon.

I listed two possible suspects. I've already stated that I think individuals within the U.S. government assisted in this entire attack. I've also stated that American citizens have assisted in this attack. One citizen, although not involved with 9/11 to my knowledge, was assisting one of the possible suspects. I would suggest examining the 1993 attack and the FBI's involvement with that endeavor as a starting point for my suspicions.

Why would I try to argue sheer speculation at JREF, when only factually supported positions are accepted?
Click to expand...

Hmmmm....

You apparently still won’t say how the US "assisted" the attack or explain who rigged up the towers.


Assuming that your SLC position is still held (that secret demolition squads rigged up the towers) I’ve pieced together your theory as follows:

- The US government sent demolition agents to rig up the WTC towers with bombs knowing that Al Qaeda would attempt an attack with hijacked planes

- Al Qaeda terrorists planted a bomb in the sub-levels of the North Tower as a back-up plan in case the hijacking doesn’t work

- On 9/11 Al Qaeda terrorists hijacked two planes and slamed them into the WTC towers

- The plane impact and resulting fires did not significantly damage the charges planted by US agents

- At almost the exact same time as the plane hits the North Tower, the back-up device was detonated in order to weaken the core and aid in a collapse that Al Qaeda wasn’t expecting

- An hour or so later the demolition charges were detonated resulting in a collapse from the impact zone

- Even though the Al Qaeda basement bomb weakened the core, part of the core remains briefly standing after the collapse

:confused:

That about cover it, Swing?
 
Swing Dangler said:
Beach, answer me this question and stop avoiding it, the jetfuelA which is of course different that the military grade jet fuel you are experienced with, was it white at altitude or on the ground or below the ground? And why are you trying to compare military grade jet fuel with passenger jetfuel, anyway?
When you watched or put the jet fuel into the airplanes tanks, was it white or clear?

Under what conditions, Beach? At altitude? I was shown how kerosene smoke machines can turn kerosene fuel white. On my own research, I've seen jetfuelA in white form at altitude as it was forced through a small nozzel under high pressure conditions, and even then it has something to do with the spectrum of light.

Beach, please explain why clouds or fog for that matter are white? Are they born white? Are they white like the background I'm typing in? I know the answer, I'm waiting to see how you will answer.
Click to expand...

You are talking to a pilot with only 34 years of experience with flying and fuels. You made a mistake. I have flown and used JP4, JP5, JP8, JP7, JetA1 (and real live commercial jet fuel) (i have even used other fuels). Darn, they all make a cloud as I have said, over and over again. I have refueled my own jet (I have take fuel samples, there are sumps on all my tanks; your welcome). I have flown one jet which had JP7, JP4, and JetA1 all in a few days. The fuel the airliners use, gave me the best milage, JP5 was close. But they all fog up like a cloud, see for yourself. (exmaples of jet fuel, all kinds can be found making clouds, and even others have shown you fuels like the jet fuel on 9/11 can make a cloud many different ways)

http://www.sonnyradio.com/F15.wmv like a cloud, cool airplane.

Explain why clouds are white, god did it, water or fuel, blame god, or nature, I am sorry you need help, you believe in fiction, why not believe in nature. Nature is real, 9/11 truth is fiction. You need to change your mind. You are trying to make up stuff by twisting the evidence to fit your made up stories.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/faeanim.gif http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJAs_3MiV00

Clouds, they are real, your ideas on 9/11 are not real.
 
Last edited:
Wow looks looks like that F-15 was creating a very nice Chemtrail.

And Swing sure believes in chemtrails.
 
All kinds of thinks explode

This silly idea Swing has that only a certain type of jet fuel can explode is ridicules.

Just about anything that will burn can if vaporized or made into a fine enough dust will rapidly burn, aka explode. Even grain

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grain_elevator
"An interesting problem the old elevators had was that of silo explosions. Fine powder from the millions of grains passing through the facility would accumulate and mix with the oxygen in the air. A spark could spread from one floating grain to the other creating a chain reaction that would destroy the entire structure. (This dispersed-fuel explosion is the mechanism behind fuel-air bombs.) To prevent this, elevators have very rigorous rules against smoking or any other open flame. Many elevators also have various devices installed to maximize ventilation, safeguards against overheating in belt conveyors, legs, bearing, and explosion-proof electrical devices such as electric motors, switches and lighting."
 
"please explain why clouds or fog for that matter are white? Are they born white? Are they white like the background I'm typing in? I know the answer, I'm waiting to see how you will answer."

The "whiteness" has nothing to do with what the vapor is made of but is the fact the tiny droplets of liquid or dust scatter the light reflected thru it. You can have a cloud of water vapor, or jet fuel vapor or paint thinner for that matter, and turpentine vapor will explode.

I imagine comparing JP7,jet fuel and JetA1 is like comparing premium gas to regular. Both will explode and burn with the same ferocity under same conditions.

But Swing has to create a controversy where there is none, Well because that is all he has. No real facts, No real logic, No real experts to back him up. Just a blind religious faith to the cause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom