Molten Steel

[beachnut]

No "looks like" means "looks like" that is why he said "looks like".

He doesn't think it was a CD, he thinks and said it looked like one, which we all already know it looked like CD (only with little noise, and no flashes).

You are right. But C7 does not know right from wrong on ideas about 911.

 

[ozeco41]

No "looks like" means "looks like" that is why he said "looks like".

He doesn't think it was a CD, he thinks and said it looked like one, which we all already know it looked like CD (only with little noise, and no flashes).

Ditto for all those alleged explosions which "sounded like an explosion".

...and are inferred to mean steel cutting explosives. Reported by people who have never heard steel cutting high explosives....

.....because if they had they may have used different terminology - one heard not forgotten.

 

[Christopher7]

Since (with one very small exception) there is no aspect of the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2 which needed to be caused by demolition OR was assisted by any demolition technique why should Government waste more public money?

That's not true nor is it relevant. In an investigation of mass murder and the destruction of three skyscrappers, all leads must be investigated. Money is NOT a consideration. To suggest that it should be is ridiculous.

The only legitimate reason for doing more investigation is to explain to citizens who are genuinely concerned AND unqualified persons how it happened and why there was no demolition.

We are talking about a hundred or more witnesses saying there were explosions. That must be investigated. It would have been a very simple matter to test for explosive reside. They tested extensively for DNA but not explosives. That is not a real investigation, it's a whitewash.

The "official stories" are not perfect, but for the three WTC buildings they are valid and credible explanations.

How can they be valid if they don't explain the total collapse. That's the part that needs to be studied and explained the most.

In hindsight possible the WTC 1&2 investigation stopping at "global collapse was inevitable" did not go far enough for the genuine concerned citizens.

"global collapse was inevitable" is a non explanation, a farce.
Twenty million dollars, 10,000 pages and no explanation for the total collapse.

 

[Christopher7]

Ditto for all those alleged explosions which "sounded like an explosion".

Only to a devout Bush apologist. Why are you so adamantly defending the most reviled president in our history?

...and are inferred to mean steel cutting explosives. Reported by people who have never heard steel cutting high explosives....

Get serious. You are saying only an expert can identify explosives going off. That is just an excuse to hand wave all the witnesses who heard explosions. In a mass murder, all possibilities MUST be investigated.

.....because if they had they may have used different terminology - one heard not forgotten.

Please, you are playing word games.

I find it curious that so many non-Americans on this forum are so staunchly defending our government.

 

[BigAl]

Only to a devout Bush apologist. Why are you so adamantly defending the most reviled president in our history?

Get serious. You are saying only an expert can identify explosives going off. That is just an excuse to hand wave all the witnesses who heard explosions. In a mass murder, all possibilities MUST be investigated.

There were no explosions loud enough or timed to be consistant with man-made demolition and collapse of a tower.

The sound of any demolition explosion would have been captured on the sound tracks of all the video cameras in use at WTC. There were lots of cameras. None of them have demolition explosions on the sound track.

 

[Christopher7]

So what - there are nearly always many confused witnesses around major disasters. and that before the "middle men" start to twist the words and verbal those witnesses.

Yes and you-all are the middle men twisting words in an attempt to hand wave the over 100 witnesses that said they hard and saw explosions.

Your blind faith in an administration known for lying is most curious.

The real question is still not "Are we correctly reporting what the witness said?"

You are denying any possibility that they heard explosives going off. That is just parroting the government BSOCT.

It is "Was the building demolished?" Since none of the buildings were demolished it matters not whether the witness was rightly or wrongly reported.

It matters when so many witnesses report explosives. Your groping for reasons to not investigate are very telling.

 

[Toke]

Ahem. Orange SHERBERT!

Disinfo!

Vanilla ice.

shrill.

 

[Mercutio]

I see that C7 has expanded the number of people whose words he uses in telling his lies.

I'd ask you to check with your firefighter to see if he agrees with you, but that would be tantamount to a personal threat; you'd never get away with such an insult.

 

[Christopher7]

There were no explosions loud enough or timed to be consistant with man-made demolition and collapse of a tower.

Like the government you are trying to protect, you ask for proof before investigation. There was sufficient cause to investigate for explosives.

The sound of any demolition explosion would have been captured on the sound tracks of all the video cameras in use at WTC. There were lots of cameras. None of them have demolition explosions on the sound track.

You know the government collected and is withholding nearly 7,000 video clips and you have the gall to say there is no video evidence. Get serious.

The sound of explosives was heard by over 100 first responders and others. That needs to be investigated, not hand waved and ignored. Once again you are asking for proof of demolition before investigating the possibility of explosives.

 

[BigAl]

Like the government you are trying to protect, you ask for proof before investigation. There was sufficient cause to investigate for explosives.

You know the government collected and is withholding nearly 7,000 video clips and you have the gall to say there is no video evidence. Get serious.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. All the video was private property.

Much of the video we have is described in Watching The world change; The Stories behind the images of 9/11 By David Friend

WTC was witnessed by hundreds of thousands of people. If the video you imagine exists showed man-made demolition, the 100s of thousands of eyewitnesses would have seen it, too. Nobody did.

None of the eyewitnesses seem to have a problem with the standard story as far as not hearing any man-made demolition goes.

There is no "eyewitnesses for truth" group.

 

[Christopher7]

I see that C7 has expanded the number of people whose words he uses in telling his lies.

Your calling someone a liar is a joke. I am saying there were a hundred or so witnesses who said they heard and/or saw explosions. That is the truth and you are the liar.

I'd ask you to check with your firefighter to see if he agrees with you

My firefighter? Please, you constantly try to say the witnesses are 'my' witnesses in an attempt to discredit them by calling me a liar. They are the witnesses.

 

[BigAl]

Your calling someone a liar is a joke. I am saying there were a hundred or so witnesses who said they heard and/or explosions. That is the truth and you are the liar.

My firefighter? Please, you constantly try to say the witnesses are 'my" witnesses in an attempt to discredit them by calling me a liar. They are the witnesses.

"Explosion" is a good word for "loud noise". It doesn't meant that the noise was made by man-made explosives.


Try reading the full transcripts for the firemen you cite.

 

[Christopher7]

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. All the video was private property.

So what? There was no reason to withhold them from their owners in the first place. NIST made digital copies and filed them all on a computer.

Now they require a long drawn out Freedom of Information Act request and have still not released any that I know of.
This is a cover up. You will deny that but you can't deny the bottom line.

There are nearly 7,000 video clips we haven't seen so stop saying there are no videos that captured the sounds oif explosions.

 

[beachnut]

Some of the explosions heard were bodies hitting the ground.

Yet not one person claims to have heard explosives exploding. This is the glowing steel thread. And so far no one saw flowing melted steel making explosive sounds, most of the OP people never saw anything glowing, some of the listed people are not even right but just lies, and the rest hearsay. Glowing steel is not melted steel so why did the OP and thread speak of molten, i.e. glowing steel? What does it mean for the big picture, the SIOP of 911Truth?

 

[Minadin]

Since (with one very small exception) there is no aspect of the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2 which needed to be caused by demolition OR was assisted by any demolition technique why should Government waste more public money?

That's not true nor is it relevant. In an investigation of mass murder and the destruction of three skyscrappers, all leads must be investigated. Money is NOT a consideration. To suggest that it should be is ridiculous.

Chris - I see that your knowledge of Civics is as extensive as your knowledge of Physics and Engineering.

You see, because we live in democratic republic, because you are talking about using public money, and because the members of the taxpaying public who are relatively content with the investigation that has occurred outnumber those who are not by roughly 20:1, it's extremely relevant. In fact, one might call it The Relevant Thing. That 5% of the population consists of kooks who believe in crazy theories doesn't give them the right to use the resources of the other 95% of us who don't want to pay for their nuttery.

Even if conspiracy theorists are right, and the towers were brought down by shadow elements of the NWO inside our own government, with Israeli assistance, using Hush-a-Boom explosives and thermite-coated steel planted in 1971, in order to provoke conflict in the Middle East . . . because you're such a minority, you still don't have the right to abscond with our money to try to prove it to the world - even if you are correct.

Here's an idea: If you can get solid support from even 5% of the roughly 140 million taxpayers in the USA, that's still 7 million people. If you each give $5 to the cause, you could fund your own investigation to look into whatever you like. Take the initiative.

Don't ask us to pay for it; do it yourselves, because, as far as the rest of us are concerned:

The only legitimate reason for doing more investigation is to explain to citizens who are genuinely concerned AND unqualified persons how it happened and why there was no demolition.

 

[BigAl]

So what? There was no reason to withhold them from their owners in the first place. NIST made digital copies and filed them all on a computer.

Video tapes were never "withheld".

None of the 100s of thousands of eyewitnesses report seeing things that weren't in the news at the time and we can't watch on YouTube today.

Many of us are New Yorkers. I am. We saw stuff and know others that saw other stuff. Nobody reports man-made demolition.

 

[Christopher7]

"Explosion" is a good word for "loud noise". It doesn't meant that the noise was made by man-made explosives.

That is one possibility.

You will never admit the other possibility.

What all those witnesses heard could have been explosives.

The fact that you won't even acknowledge that is very telling.

Try reading the full transcripts for the firemen you cite.

I have. some are very explicit, some are vague. There is more than enough to warrant testing for explosives.

 

[Christopher7]

Chris - I see that your knowledge of Civics is as extensive as your knowledge of Physics and Engineering.

Your condescending attitude is just an attempt to declare yourself superior. You are not. You are just an anonymous poster with a snotty attitude on a very biased forum.

 

[Toke]

BigAl,

Are there any simpleton* guidelines for linear shapecharges to cut steel?

*I am not a simpleton, just want want the easy version, PM if neccecary.

 

[A W Smith]

Goats will eat just about anything!

There are nearly 7,000 video clips we haven't seen so stop saying there are no videos that captured the sounds oif explosions.

But It was the goats!! after they gnawed down the wtc they ate 7000 video clips! We must stop the goats from destroying more evidence! Then they escaped to Hoboken via the path tubes! I saw a Shepard I did! Steven Jones must test for goats!!!