Witnesses Corroborating Rodriguez's Claims?

[DGM]

below is a point by point argument by mackey concerning the evidence in support of the hypothesis that the explosions were caused by jet fuel. does this evidence remove the possibility that the explosion heard by numerous people in the basement was caused by liquid explosives?


/snipped for space/

What would the liquid explosives be used for?

Surely your not saying to weaken the structure. Remember the large thick structural steel members and the lack of blast injuries.

 

[Lurker]

i find it difficult to believe in the extreme that some muslim in a cave could have organised the 911 attacks given the reasons you have just outlined.

Why? Osama was technical, I believe even college educated. The plot did not need too much. Basic flight training, carry on box cutters which were legal at the time. Some coordination on timing. That's about it, right? Sure there are some questions about how to get everyone into the US but the logistics are not a deal breaker.

What do you consider so difficult?

 

[beachnut]

has to be a classic stupid statement, in the extreme

i find it difficult to believe in the extreme that some muslim in a cave could have organised the 911 attacks given the reasons you have just outlined.

This is the dumbest statement of the whole truth movement! Super dumb.
Look at this complicated long list of hard steps to make 9/11 come true.
1. Hijack plane
2. Kill pilots
3. Fly planes into buildings.

 

[thewholesoul]

And just how would the fact that OBL was a Muslim impair his ability to have been behind the attacks?

What does the cave have to do with anything?

I find this argument to be arrogant, elitist and racist in the extreme.

i find your response entirely missed the point i was making in order to throw in a few insults.

whether it was a muslim, jew or some christian in a cave really had nothing to do what i was saying. your twisting my words.

my point was that i find it more plausible that liquid explosives could be planted in a building in terms of organisation etc as opposed to the planning and execution of a terrorist attack as witnessed in 911.

 

[DavidJames]

i find your response entirely missed the point i was making in order to throw in a few insults.

whether it was a muslim, jew or some christian in a cave really had nothing to do what i was saying. your twisting my words.

Boy you guys really have problems defending your own words. Here were your exact words, no twisting, your EXACT words.

i find it difficult to believe in the extreme that some muslim in a cave could have organised the 911 attacks given the reasons you have just outlined.

You really need to take a few steps back and think hard and long about what you intend to write. I would suggest the same strategy for what you believe.

 

[thewholesoul]

Boy you guys really have problems defending your own words. Here were your exact words, no twisting, your EXACT words.You really need to take a few steps back and think hard and long about what you intend to write. I would suggest the same strategy for what you believe.

so it is racist if i expressed doubt that a christian or jew could plan such an event? it was about the planning and execution NOT about there race. that was my point and that is why i said you twisted my words.

because it is beleived that muslims carried out 911 people in america and elsewhere have become more racist against muslims, it increases islamaphobia.

911 truthers believe it was an inside job thus they are claiming that muslims are not responsible.

 

[beachnut]

so it is racist if i expressed doubt that a christian or jew could plan such an event? it was about the planning and execution NOT about there race. that was my point and that is why i said you twisted my words.

because it is beleived that muslims carried out 911 people in america and elsewhere have become more racist against muslims, it increases islamaphobia.

911 truthers believe it was an inside job thus they are claiming that muslims are not responsible.

LOL

To prove he is not a racist bum, who thinks guys in caves are too challenged to do 9/11. Our "I am not racist but you are" guy says, the United States did it to themselves. See I am not racist, he says, I am blaming Americans who are racists.

Sorry, I think you missed the point and are making up weird ideas. 19 terrorist did attack the United States and people who are ignorant of that fact are making stupid statements like yours. And it appears the terrorist were of Islam, seems you can not even get your insults correct, they did attack the United States, it is a small group of fools who make up lies about 9/11. You are the one who said Muslims could not do 9/11, it is most likely you are racist on the subject, most Americans know most Muslims were not in on 9/11. Guess you could try again to learn about 9/11 before you continue to make errors and false conclusions, and sweeping generalizations.

 

[R.Mackey]

because nobody knows what type of explosives, if any, were used means that liquid explosives is a possibility. and none of the evidence provided by mackey removes this possibility, in fact, some of it supports this hypothesis.

You are deeply confused.

There is nothing special about "liquid explosives." The most commonly known, I think, is nitroglycerine. Its effects are basically indistinguishable from any typical solid explosive, such as dynamite, which is a derivative of nitroglycerine.

There is nothing about the WTC events that suggests explosives. As before, had explosives, liquid or otherwise, been employed, we would expect to see structural, sonic, or seisomgraphic events consistent with explosives. We do not.

You're grasping at straws in a subject you do not comprehend. Stop it. Learn from us. Your whole approach is predicated on you being right and us being wrong, and all the evidence suggests this assumption is wrong.

 

[HawksFan]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with thewholesoul and admit that there is ample evidence that liquid explosives were used in the towers. The liquid explosives were (not so) secretly brought into the towers in the large fuel tanks of the planes. Those liquid explosives were then transferred to the basement area through the various elevator shafts and the resultant damage is quite apparent in the testimony of the survivors in the basement areas.

Congratulations, thewholesoul, you got one right.

 

[DavidJames]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with thewholesoul and admit that there is ample evidence that liquid explosives were used in the towers. The liquid explosives were (not so) secretly brought into the towers in the large fuel tanks of the planes. Those liquid explosives were then transferred to the basement area through the various elevator shafts and the resultant damage is quite apparent in the testimony of the survivors in the basement areas.

Congratulations, thewholesoul, you got one right.

You realize of course you just made thewholesoul's head explode, I hope you're happy

 

[HawksFan]

As long as I don't have to clean it up, I'm good with it.

 

[Blackwell]

so it is racist if i expressed doubt that a christian or jew could plan such an event? it was about the planning and execution NOT about there race. that was my point and that is why i said you twisted my words.

because it is beleived that muslims carried out 911 people in america and elsewhere have become more racist against muslims, it increases islamaphobia.

911 truthers believe it was an inside job thus they are claiming that muslims are not responsible.

What is it about the planning of the event that you find doubtful? Are you aware of the airliner hijackings that occurred during the 70s and 80s? Is it too much of a stretch for you to think that rather than simply hijack an aircraft, someone could then go and pilot that aircraft into a building?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

i find it difficult to believe in the extreme that some muslim in a cave could have organised the 911 attacks given the reasons you have just outlined.

Would you consider yourself a racist, thewholesoul? Because... that was a pretty damn racist comment. Is this the seed that's sprouted the black and twisted tree we're all looking at right now?

"[Khalid Sheikh Mohammed] attended Chowan College, a small Baptist school in Murfreesboro, North Carolina, for a few years (beginning in 1983) before transferring to the North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University and completing a degree in mechanical engineering in 1986."^WP

Edit:

so it is racist if i expressed doubt that a christian or jew could plan such an event?

OK, so... you're not being racist. Fine. The only other option I see now is that you're just stupendously ignorant of the subject matter. See above.

"In a cave" suggests that you believe the perpetrators lacked the education or the resources to carry out the attacks as detailed. You'd be amazingly wrong on both counts.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

hey thanks for the links i will check them out when i get time and of course i could refer you to other studies were they claim there was not enough potential energy.

No problem. If you want to link to rebuttals to Greening's work, you can go ahead. I've seen some of them already; others here have as well, but it wouldn't hurt at all to replicate the links. And some might welcome it, so that they'll be saved from having to do a search. Anyway, I'll let the engineering types here - rwguinn, R. Mackey, et. all (forgive me for missing anyone else who's commented on this topic) - handle that. Short and to the point, there are some flaws in others works, Ross's in particular, that make the claim about not enough PE being available.

conceptually i just cant imagine it. allow me, if you would, present a simple metaphor. imagine you have a spinal columns supported to remain in a vertical upright position and you drop the head. now conceptually what you are saying is that because the head is basically heavier than the first vertical column then that will be crushed then because the head is heavier than the second vertical column then that too will be crushed...and so on and so forth until there is nothing left not even then head.

or imagine a fly lands on top of a pin, vertically upright in a pin cushion. because the fly (1g) has enough potential energy to crush the first few molecules (.001g) then this process will continue until you have no pin left.

the vertical spin or the pin are designed to support the head or the fly, as was the 90+ floors of vertical columns designed to support the upper 20 floor portion.

the resistance of the first vertical column derives from ALL the vertical columns below.

Due respect, you're making several mistakes there. I think I may need some of the engineering types whom I keep invoking to word the arguments better, but as I understand them, 1. There's a scaling issue, as a totally homogenous structure like a pin, or even a far less homogenous one such as a spine wouldn't react to stress from the upper level in the same way as the lower segments of the Twin Towers do. And 2. A head is not a static load, and the dynamic load of a fly landing on a pin is insignificant compared to the load the segments above the impact zones imposed on the lower sections when the collapse started.

how you can make this argument against the possibility that explosives were implanted is surprising. let me respond in kind the extreme requirememts of a terrorist attack as grand as 911 includes an amazing coordination of opportunity, expertise, and knowledge.
i find it difficult to believe in the extreme that some muslim in a cave could have organised the 911 attacks given the reasons you have just outlined.
indeed if we are to remove the most extreme hypothesis through occam's razor then the "terrorist plotting in a cave" hypothesis over "the planting liquid explosives" should be the one to go, in my opinion.

Again, with all due respect, that's a stretch. First of all, the terrorists were hardly "in caves"; that implies the planners as well as the hijackers were from some paleolithic culture, and had an educational level equivalent to that. That couldn't be farther from the truth. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the principle planner, had been living in Kuwait and Pakistan, and had a degree in mechanical engineering. Bin Laden had attended college in either economics, business, or civil engineering (multiple sources disagree on specifics, but agree that he had indeed at least started along a higher-education path. Hani Hanjour (an oft mentioned participant, given all the posts regarding his flight) attended university in Germany and was living in the states, and not in some cave. You'll see that all the participants were hardly "living in caves".

Plus, you're not outlining why the terrorist attack scenario imposed extreme requirements. Purchasing tickets, attacking people with knives, boxcutters, and other weapons, etc. are hardly extreme requirements. So the question stands: What coordination of opporunity, expertise, and knowledge to execute the "terrorist scenario" would be necessary? The pilot training would be one that could be a small difficulty, but there's much evidence to show that some participants did indeed manage to obtain some. What coordination of opportunity was required besides obtaining tickets for flights on the same day? That's hardly an extreme act; it's merely an act of selecting a specific time during the purchase. What coordination of opportunity, expertise, and knowledge was involved in overcoming what little resistance exists on a commercial flight? Back then, it's not like people were told to actively resist.

It is of course your perogative to claim that the "terrorist attack" scenario imposed extreme requirements, but it would help if you would identify what those requirements are. Frankly, I don't see them. Whereas the extreme requirements imposed upon the demolitions scenario have been listed many times over in this forum (but to repeat a subset of them: How to install explosives and not change the collapse initiation point, how to actually install the explosives (liquid or not), when would plotters have the opportunity to install such explosives, and so on, and so forth).

Again, the hijack scenario is the most likely one requiring the least amount of extraordinary occurances. Remember: Flights had been hijacked before, and if anything, the problem was that passenger and air crews had been habituated into giving in, not resisting (no hijacking had resulted in a suicide flight before). All the other events to get the hijackers in place and prepared for the hijackings were hardly unlikely confluences of events, opportunity, and knowledge. They were, in fact, mundane occurances: Enter the country on student or visitors visas, get pilot training, purchase knives, obtain airplane tickets, etc. But the explosives scenario... well, I've stated the problems over and over, and so have others in this forum. Frankly, none of the events in a demolitions scenario are mundane or expected. That's why I called them "extreme" and "extraordinary".
I'm rambling. I'll let others also respond to this. But in summary, it would help to have some elucidation on what makes the "terrorist scenario" so complex and unusual.

Thank you.

 

[brasil]

Not surprisingly, everyone is ganging up on thewholesoul and I don't see any intelligent, well-thought out replies to the points I made before they got buried. I suggested that it would make perfect sense for terrorists to try to improve on their 1993 strategy, which used a truck bomb in the basement, and add plane impacts to the scenario. Not surprisingly, the twisting around of my words and the insults flew and I was told it's a "stupid" idea and that i'm an "idiot." Well, if you think I'm an idiot then you think the FBI are idiots:

video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGE6GNKNpPA
relevant transcript:

Lauren Ashburn: "Joining me is Jack Kelley, now he is a foreign correspondent - war correspondent - and just came back from Israel. He has some information about these attacks. Jack, what can you tell us happened, first in New York."

Jack Kelly: "Um, apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time 2 planes hit the building, that there ... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings, which also exploded at the same time and brought both of them down."

Lauren Ashburn: "Now that's the first time were hearing that, so 2 planes and explosives that were in the building, is that correct?"

Jack Kelley: "That is the working theory at this point, that is still unconfirmed but that is what the FBI is going on at this point."

Before saying "then why didn't the buildings collapse from the bottom up blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda," I'll say it again:

Because maybe the terrorists could not predict what was going to happen but merely added to the 1993 strategy of only using bombs, and hoped to get lucky and finally destroy the towers. If this is in fact what happened, then they most definitely did get lucky. There is nothing unreasonable about any of this, especially considering the reporting by USA today saying it's what the FBI initially thought. The FBI was right down there at their headquarters and had plenty of opportunity to investigate for themselves and talk to witnesses. So is the FBI "stupid" too?

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Brazil, did it ever occur to you that after the '93 bombing, that they changed/ improved security in the building?

 

[T.A.M.]

How about, instead, you look at it this way...

LEARNING from the mistake in 1993 that failed to bring the tower down, and failed to kill any great number of people, the terrorists abandoned the "bombs in the basement" theory, and instead went with "planes as weapons".

TAM

 

[thewholesoul]

Basic flight training

maybe you should talk with the pilots for 911 truth about that.

as for osama being a smart guy, i still find it unbelievable that 4 planes can be hijacked and three of them hit three of there targets without the most financed and modern military the world has ever seen doing absolutely nothing...one big whopsy - i dont buy it.

if you admit someone made a mistake or incompetance then how can you explain no-one getting punished. only promotions handed out??

and condolisa rice lying that they had no knowledge that someone would attack with planes - failure of imagination - yea right.

bush not even going under oath to the 911 commission and had to be accompanied by cheney- the whole thing stinks. and whether or not there were explosives in the towers at the very least someone had foreknowledge - how could a cook like alex jones predict 911??

and aeron russo in a conversation with one of nick rockerfeller was told that a major event (reffering to 911) was under way and from which the war on terror would be born.

 

[brasil]

Brazil, did it ever occur to you that after the '93 bombing, that they changed/ improved security in the building?

Did it occur to you that the terrorists would obviously be aware of this and change their methods for getting bombs into the building? How many terrorists have used bombs in the last decade? If security is being improved all over the world in response to continuing attacks with bombs, it is apparently having little to no effect on the blowing up of trains, buildings, and cars. Everyone here is so condescending it's ridiculous. I'm not stupid, and I don't feel I have to spell out the obvious. All you're doing is wasting space with comments like that, and not actually replying to my ideas. So typical here....

 

[brasil]

How about, instead, you look at it this way...

LEARNING from the mistake in 1993 that failed to bring the tower down, and failed to kill any great number of people, the terrorists abandoned the "bombs in the basement" theory, and instead went with "planes as weapons".

TAM

How about you respond to what i actually wrote and explain why the FBI's first working theory on 9-11 was bombs+airplanes?