The OP, without a photo that takes the text out to europe...
Warning: the BS below might be worse than waterboarding...
Corruption in big-city police departments is legendary.
And has nothing to do with 911.
Countless movies about dirty cops litter the video shelves; movies like Serpico, Internal Affairs, and the Godfather depict corruption everywhere.
And has nothing to do with 911.
Everyone’s aware of Philadelphia PD corruption, of the LAPD and Rodney King, etc., etc.
And has nothing to do with 911. Rodney King? lol, is he your hero too?
To a lesser known extent, but likely just as corrupt, come other big city departments, like the fire departments and social services, or the mayor’s offices. Influence peddling (read: graft, bribery) in local and national governments is commonplace, but we common folk prefer not to talk about it, or tell ourselves the good guys win in the end. It’s a happy fantasy.
And has nothing to do with 911.
We’ve all heard the stories about the brave FDNY and the rivers of molten steel.
No, there were no rivers of melted steel. But the FDNY was brave.
The fire department is presented as hero-victims of 9/11 ais therefore beyond suspicion and reproach, as is their claim of molten steel. Second only to the FDNY on the sympathy scale is the NYPD, but what many people don’t know is not only was steel in the sky turned molten by kerosene on 9/11, but according to the NYPD, it also melted concrete a thousand feet below and not only that but after it cooled, it solidified back into concrete, encasing firearms therein.
They were heroes. Wait till they read this.
There was not melted steel.
I have not seen on fireman say there was melted concrete.
Melted concrete; why would they say that? Are they trying to give the impression that if the fires were so intense they could melt concrete then there’s no doubt they would melt steel? Since I look at everything as possible propaganda, that’s the Pachyderm-sized take-home lesson I have sitting in my living room, but I’m a cynic so let’s examine this claim to first see if it’s even possible.
To fool gullible people like you?
The fires were intense enough for people to jump instead of burn to death. Is that hot enough, is that intense enough. Are you going to make fun of the people who jumped? No wonder you were banned at crazy 911 truth forums, you are unique. Your claims are stupid.
And has nothing to do with 911.
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani is the godfather to Kerik’s children:
Fact:
And has nothing to do with 911.
Much of the photographic "evidence" of jet parts was supplied by Bernie Kerik's police department; photographs such as this, showing a wheel wedged in an exterior panel are offered as proof of the power of the alleged impact:
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/column-right.jpg
Yes, it proves an aircraft hit the WTC. Debunks the idiotic lie of no plane.
And this one of the alleged engine nestled near a street sign.
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/6310312271.jpg
Yes, it is a 767 engine. Debunks the no-plane lies.
So without the NYPD, we would have very few photographs of plane parts, and without the FDNY and FEMA we’d have very few stories of “rivers of molten steel”, but here the New York Police Museum gets into the game and offers this display of firearms encased in concrete that became so hot it turned to "lava" and then re-solidified, encasing handguns stored in an evidence room in the Customs office in WTC6.
Wrong, we have multiple sources for the aircraft parts, and we have multiple RADAR sites proving 11 and 175 did the impacts. Makes your failed insane claims, nonsense.
The only problem is, concrete doesn’t melt. My personal experience with heating concrete tells me that it pops and breaks up as it heats. Because concrete is not "stone" but a mixture of sand and gravel bonded with cement and water, the melting temperatures of the components of concrete must be considered.
Concrete can't melt? lol
And has nothing to do with 911.
Once the water and CO2 are boiled away (breaking up the concrete), the remaining components of sand and gravel would need to melt before the concrete would be considered "lava". Google searches for the melting point of sand vary, but in general, silicon dioxide (sand) needs to reach at least 1510-1710 C before melting.
And has nothing to do with 911.
A quick evaluation of the images shows the concrete aggregate is still visible, which proves it did not turn to "lava". This appears to be simply waterlogged (from firehoses), concrete and gypsum dust mixed with construction slag and then compressed under the building debris, but one thing’s for sure, it ain’t melted and then solidified concrete; you see steel melts at between 1452-1540 C. but the guns didn't melt. Had the concrete turned to lava, the guns would have been turned to liquid first, or are we to believe the guns "re-solidified" as well?
So? You just solved the problem. The collapse of the WTC made concrete lump together under the tremendous weight of collapse, and energy greater as big as a small nuke. Like the nukes you say never existed.
Right here is simple proof the police lied, and it wasn't just a little lie; they built a museum exhibit to indoctrinate school children. If they lied about this, what else did they lie about? Bernie Kerik will be out of the slam next year, perhaps we should ask him.
Yank
No you don't have proof of anything; we have foaming at the mouth rant about silly topics which don't prove anything, but you have a fantasy you can't define with math and physics.
Did you use math to prove nukes don't exist? Why are you anti-science?
)
