WTC-7 Was Taken Down Using Controlled Demolition

[twinstead]

Fantasies is right. Like I said: one big argument from incredulity.

 

[twinstead]

Just listen to yourself! You want everyone to believe Senor Bushie, Karl “The Biggest Liar In The World” Rove, Dick “The Henchman” Cheney and Larry “Pull It” Silverstein when a ‘real’ WTC Investigation is made impossible by the destruction of evidence by these same inside-job bad guys!

Yup. All we believe about 911 was told to us by the Bush Administration. Sure thing bud. LOL

Just listen to yourself. You want everyone to believe people like you who rant and rave and spew spittle about things they know nothing about. Yea, that's going to happen.

And of course all the evidence just MUST have been destroyed. Because we all know absence of evidence MUST mean it was destroyed. God forbid it just DIDN'T EXIST in the first place.

So. How about that DNA evidence at the Pentagon?

 

[Terral]

Answers To 1337 Questions

Hi 1337:

1337 >> Please explain why he would mention "terrible loss of life" if he were talking about demolition. Please also explain away these problems with your theory:

You are asking me to tell you WHY (Have you gone BONKERS?) Larry Silverstein used particular language? :0) Your “Building Fire” excuse for the WTC-7 Collapse is making you delusional . . . I cannot help it if ‘your’ Building Fires Did It explanation makes no sense at all, but that is ‘your’ problem. :0)

1337 >> Problem #1, Larry Silverstein is not a demolition contractor, neither was the fire department chief, so why should we assume they’d be using slang demolition terms?

Larry Silverstein was taking back and forth with the Controlled Demolition Supervisor from the Israeli Spy Ring (they warned these people) for the six weeks prior to the WTC-7 Collapse (we were warned by Israeli Intelligence). His famous “Pull It” conversation has nothing to do with any Fire Chief. The Israeli Spy Ring CD specialist had been saying, “. . . when we Pull It . . .” in previous conversations for this to become Mr. Silverstein’s defining “Freudian Slip.” Subconsciously Mr. Pull It Silverstein is the murderer of innocent Americans who very much wants to get caught, but Loyal Bushie FBI/DoD Inside Job Counterintelligence Operatives (with your JREF assistance) work every day to hide ‘the’ 911Truth.

1337 >> Problem #2, Silverstein says "they made that decision to pull", for instance -- the Fire Department. If "pull" means "demolish", then he's saying the Fire Department may not have decided to bring the building down if they couldn't contain the fire, but because it was beyond them, they decided to blow it up. Does this make sense? Not in the slightest.

Only if Silverstein is talking to the CD Supervisor making the final preparations to “Pull it.” The Fire Chief had no means nor the time to even begin wiring WTC-7 for demolition, when he showed up on 9/11. All of that was done in the previous six-week period from the moment he took possession of the Twin Towers.

1337 >> Problem #3, Silverstein is suggesting that the decision to demolish the building was optional. It might not have happened. Does this fit with the idea of a convenient insurance scam? No, not at all.

Yes, but 9/11 is about MUCH more than stealing money from We The People through insurance scams . . .

1337 >> Problem #4, why would the Fire Department willingly agree to engage in a multi-million dollar insurance fraud?

The FDNY and NYPD are 9/11 VICTIMS without prior knowledge of these attacks.

1337 >> Problem #5, and since when do Fire Departments blow up buildings anyway?

Never in this situation, but the man responsible for the Controlled Demolition (Silverstein) was talking to the CD Supervisor and not any Fire Chief when making his “Pull It” recommendations. Anyone willing to murder innocent Americans on 9/11 is also willing to lie about the principals of phone conversations . . .

1337 >> Problem #6, and if it's so obvious that WTC7 was demolished, then why are the insurance companies not suing Silverstein for fraud?

They raised rates to cover their losses and any restitution would be refunded back to We The People minus their legal fees. In short, the insurance companies have already made a killing on the 9/11 attacks, so they have no vested interest in bringing anyone to justice.

1337 >> Problem #7, and why would Silverstein admit this on television?

His admission of guilt was completely by accident, just like when Rudy Giuliani tipped his hand over the FEMA/Pier 29 Fiasco committed on September 10, 2001. FEMA showed up on Sept. 10 to set up emergency operations on the 23rd floor of WTC-7 in Giuliani’s newly renovated Command Bunker.

Prison Planet Article:

2) BIOWARFARE EXERCISE TRIPOD II: Alex Jones first reported on this back in May when Rudolph Giuliani let the details of it slip in his testimony to the 9/11 Commission. FEMA arrived in New York on September 10th to set up a command post located at Pier 29 under the auspices of a 'biowarfare exercise scheduled for September 12. This explains why Tom Kenney of FEMA's National Urban Search and Rescue Team, told Dan Rather of CBS News that FEMA had arrived in New York on the night of September 10th. This was originally dismissed as a slip of the tongue. Giuliani was to use this post as a command post on 9/11 after he evacuated WTC Building 7. As we reported back in January, Giuliani knew when to leave WTC 7 because he got advanced warning that the Trade Towers were about to collapse. "We were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna collapse," Rudolph Giuliani told Peter Jennings of ABC News. How did Giuliani know the towers were about to collapse when no steel building in history had previously collapsed from fire damage?

These ‘slips’ happen when guilty parties engaged in a myriad of LIES get their wires crossed and tip their hands completely by accident. Then people like you come behind to give their “Building Fires Did It” nonsense the air of believability, when all three WTC skyscrapers were taken down by Controlled Demolition all along.

GL,

Terral

 

[ElMondoHummus]

For the beginners here: Terral's distortions

I'm doing this less for Terral, who does not comprehend (perhaps intentionally?) that he doesn't even understand or correctly present the basic facts about the WTC collapse. I do this more for lurkers here to demonstrate his distortions. Note that much of this is only referenced obliquely when it's referenced at all because it's considered basic knowledge amongst many of the participants here. Therefore much of what follows doesn't get explicit mention in this thread because it has been presented before to other conspiracy theorists (which also demonstrates how far behind Terral's arguments are; the following arguments are old):

... Show us how a few building fires can cause the ‘symmetrical’ collapse...

He implies the fires were small and/or limited i.e. "a few building fires". On the contrary, these fires covered multiple acres and were severe:

http://www.911myths.com/WTC7_Lies.doc (Note: Microsoft Word document)

Building #7 was still actively burning and at that time we were advised by a NYFD Chief that building #7 was burning out of control and imminent collapse was probable.

Q: Why was building Seven on fire? Was that flaming debris from tower two, from tower two that fell onto that building and lit it on fire?

A: Correct. Because it really got going, that building Seven, saw it late in the day and like the first Seven floors were on fire. It looked like heavy fire on seven floors. It was fully engulfed, that whole building. There were pieces of tower two [sic: he probably means tower one] in building Seven and the corners of the building missing and whatnot. But just looking up at it from ground level however many stories -- it was 40 some odd -- you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that’s an entire block.

The time was approximately 11a.m. Both of the WTC towers were collapsed and the streets were covered with debris. Building #7 was still standing but burning. ...We spoke to with a FDNY Chief who has his men holed up in the US Post Office building. He informed us that the fires in building 7 were uncontrollable and that its collapse was imminent.

... and so on. Read the linked document for more testimony; I'm only quoting a small sample here.

On top of that, Terral is completely ignoring the structural damage from the Twin Towers falling on it:

The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.

(Note: In retrospect, it's probable that the damage described was from the South tower (WTC 2), not the North one (WTC 1). Things were confused that day. I'll let others more familiar with WTC 7 correct this statement if I'm wrong.)

[Shortly after the tower collapses] I don’t know how long this was going on, but I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side.

So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good...

... Butch Brandeis came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

Firehouse Magazine: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered through there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post...

So consider this: The basic premises Terral sets out are incorrect. He doesn't properly describe the extent of the fires, which were large and covered multiple floors, and he completely leaves out any mention of damage to Tower 7 from falling debris, damage which was severe. When you take all that into consideration, you realize that the building wasn't just on fire in a few places but otherwise structurally sound, it was heavily damaged and had huge fires on top of that.

In short, WTC 7 was very badly damaged. That should put the remainder of the argument into perspective.

... cause the ‘symmetrical’ collapse of a steel-framed skyscraper within a very small amount of time...

First of all, go to Google and review debris maps. A good portion of WTC 7 lay across Vessey Street. Plus, portions of the north face ended up on top of the debris piles. How is that symmetric?

You are saying that Controlled Demolition specialists need not waste months planning, wiring and setting off explosives, when all they really have to do is set a few building fires and run away.

Does this really need a response? First of all, how would "Controlled Demolition specialists" install the explosives in the buildings without anyone noticing? Go to the search functions and look up the user "NDBoston" in this forum. He worked in the towers. He never saw anything remotely approaching demolitions preparations.

Second, you don't set "a few" building fires. You drop impossibly large sections of a 110 storey skyscraper (WTC 2) on top of the building first, causing severe damage, then you set multiple floors on fire all at once. Across those floors, from one end of the building to another. Then, you let it burn for several hours (WTC 2 collapsed at 9:59am; at that time, debris from that collapse impacted WTC 7. Tower 7, in turn, collapsed after 5pm, thus it burned for several hours, as testimony shows firefighters reporting huge fires as early as 11am). You combine huge debris impact damage with large, multifloor fires. That's how you replicate the conditions at WTC 7 that day.

So let's all get one thing straight: Terral is misrepresenting the damage to WTC 7. I don't know whether it's due to genuine ignorance of what actually happened to that building on that day, or if it's simply selective presentation of evidence and deliberate hiding of contradictory information, but the point is, the picture he builds of WTC 7 does not reflect reality.

I am afraid that MANY of you simply do not realize how ridiculous the Official Bushie Cover Story has been from the very beginning. The fact that you can buy that stupidity says more about the gullibility of the American Public than anything else . . .

Now, how do you want to evaluate his arguments in the light of all that's been presented above? Is his information truly reputable, given that he's distorted basic, acknowledged, verifiable facts? You decide.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

More info for beginners: More of Terral's distortions

Larry Silverstein was taking back and forth with the Controlled Demolition Supervisor from the Israeli Spy Ring...

... The Israeli Spy Ring CD specialist had been saying, “. . . when we Pull It . . .”

...Only if Silverstein is talking to the CD Supervisor making the final preparations to “Pull it.”...

Notice the continued distortions. Click those links, if you're able to stomache the pages. Note that none of what he mentions appears at either link. Silverstein is not mentioned at all in those links. One discusses incredulity at the supposed presence of Israeli explosives experts being in the US, and doesn't link their presence to the WTC at all. The other simply mentions a warning to an Israeli telecom's staff.

Yet, you'd think that those links support his fantasy that Silverstein actually talked to Israeli explosives experts. Those links show no such thing.

Use this, too, to evaluate how reputable his arguments are. He has zero evidence that Silverstein did any of the acts he's accusing him of.

I think the point has been sufficiently demonstrated. Add all this to Terral's inability to comprehend curvilinear distortion and the difference between left and right banks when photoshopping examples (I'm being charitable here; I admit, you can also argue that he's trying to use that photo as evidence, not merely as an example), as well as his attempts to tell firefighters what they were doing wrong (just do a search here and at the Loose Change forum), and we can see that his comprehension of reality is rather tenuous. Use all that to evaluate the veracity of his stance.

 

[Terral]

Can DGM Reproduce These Cuts Using Building Fires? No! Wake The Heck Up!

Hi DGM:

DGM >> Terral: Why don't you start by explaining why the "truth" movement can't duplicate your "thermite" cut the way you said it was done but I can with my cutting torch?

Termite applications are described here and here and here where linear shaped charges are demonstrated in videos. The question is about whether Controlled Demolition took down WTC-7 OR Building Fires!!! Are you BLIND? Look again at this picture where WTC-7 has collapsed upon itself ‘and’ we see SEVERED red-iron steel components scattered throughout the debris pile! You are saying that an iron worker climbed up 40 to 50 feet into the air to make a 45-degree angle cut (heh), when all of this debris is still littering the area. You are saying that these 90-degree “Column End” cuts were made by an iron worker (heh) BEFORE they could fall down ‘and’ all the other debris fall on top of them. :0) No sir. ALL of these red-iron cuts were made DURING the Controlled Demolition Process, as evidenced by the fact that all these steel columns are positioned randomly throughout the debris pile itself. Building fires DO NOT ‘sever’ 2800-degree steel members at 90-degrees or 45-degrees or any degree. :0)

I do not want to know IF you can reproduce these cuts with your cutting torch, but IF you can reproduce this debris pile AND the severed red-iron components using building fires! Can you? No. End of story . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[twinstead]

Now, how do you want to evaluate his arguments in the light of all that's been presented above? Is his information truly reputable, given that he's distorted basic, acknowledged, verifiable facts? You decide.

I think this debate should rest on this. Terral obviously is so set in his ways that any hint that somebody may dare to challenge his conclusions are met with blind venom and lame hand waving. Terral is right. He knows, even more than most experts do, that WTC7 and WTC1 and WTC2 were controlled demolition. He doesn't care how. He doesn't care why. Any evidence to the contrary must be planted by the 'Bushie' Administration in the light of his supreme rightness.

So, let's just have this and other threads he has participated in simply stand for all to see.

Lurkers, you decide.

 

[Terral]

Their Hands Never Get Tired Of Clapping For You. :0)

Hi Drugewire

Drudge >> Wow, didn't even take a 2nd sentence to figure out there's no reason to ever click on this thread again. Gotta be some kind of record. So... um... congrats?

Never be discouraged, Drudge, because none of these JRED ‘debunkers’ (heh) have any more of a “Building Fires Did It” Case than you. Congratulations to you all for confusing your Terral-bashing with actually making a case for anything. Your three-sentence reply has as much substance as anything from those on your side of this WTC-7 Controlled Demolition/Building Fire Debate. You all deserve a big round of applause (their hands never get tired – heh) for accomplishing absolutely nothing at all. :0)

GL,

Terral

 

[twinstead]

Termite applications are described here and here and here where linear shaped charges are demonstrated in videos.

So was the building brought down by explosives or thermite, Terral? That one video is a shaped EXPLOSIVE charge, yet the Jones paper suggests it was thermite.

And if it was explosives (when you make up your mind) it wouldn't have been ONE 'boom' that we heard that day. What exactly do you think a series of those shaped explosive cutting charges (and not that piece of steel--or was it even steel?--in the video but a large load-bearing steel column). How many do you think would have been there to fell a building that size? 2? 3? 20? 100? 1000? How did they get there? What would they sound like going off in sequence?

Why didn't we hear the boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom that we should have, and ALL CDs of large buildings I've ever heard had, in the WTC collapse.

You see, every statement you make brings up twice that many questions.

 

[twinstead]

Never be discouraged, Drudge, because none of these JRED ‘debunkers’ (heh) have any more of a “Building Fires Did It” Case than you. Congratulations to you all for confusing your Terral-bashing with actually making a case for anything. Your three-sentence reply has as much substance as anything from those on your side of this WTC-7 Controlled Demolition/Building Fire Debate. You all deserve a big round of applause (their hands never get tired – heh) for accomplishing absolutely nothing at all. :0)

Well, you don't have the advantage of being able to look at your posts from the perspective of somebody who actually knows what he is talking about, so you of course can't find the humor in it.

But it's there.

 

[DGM]

Hi DGM:




Termite applications are described here and here and here where linear shaped charges are demonstrated in videos. The question is about whether Controlled Demolition took down WTC-7 OR Building Fires!!! Are you BLIND? Look again at this picture where WTC-7 has collapsed upon itself ‘and’ we see SEVERED red-iron steel components scattered throughout the debris pile! You are saying that an iron worker climbed up 40 to 50 feet into the air to make a 45-degree angle cut (heh), when all of this debris is still littering the area. You are saying that these 90-degree “Column End” cuts were made by an iron worker (heh) BEFORE they could fall down ‘and’ all the other debris fall on top of them. :0) No sir. ALL of these red-iron cuts were made DURING the Controlled Demolition Process, as evidenced by the fact that all these steel columns are positioned randomly throughout the debris pile itself. Building fires DO NOT ‘sever’ 2800-degree steel members at 90-degrees or 45-degrees or any degree. :0)

I do not want to know IF you can reproduce these cuts with your cutting torch, but IF you can reproduce this debris pile AND the severed red-iron components using building fires! Can you? No. End of story . . .

GL,

Terral

Why do you show shaped charges and then talk about thermite? If you can't reproduce the cut with thermite it never happened.

Yes I can take a building down with fire if you would like to supply the building (and the permits necessary). Can you make that thermite cut?

PS Why do you keep calling the structural steel "red iron"?

 

[Terral]

Thermite Shaped-Charges Are 2500-Degree Cutter-Charges

Hi WildCat:

WildCat >> Are you ever going to expain what the hell a "thermite shaped charge" is?

Shaped charges are explained here where you can see that any of 1000 different explosive types can be utilized. Thermate as an ‘explosive’ is described by Dr. Steven Jones here.

Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?

Of course, there is a straightforward way to achieve 1000°C temperatures (and well above) in the presence of sulfur, and that is to use thermate (or a similar variation of thermite). Thermate is a high-level thermite analog containing sulfur developed by the military (see link). Thermate combines aluminum/iron oxide (thermite) with barium nitrate (29%) and sulfur (typically 2% although more sulfur could be added). The thermate reaction proceeds rapidly and is much faster than thermite in degrading steel leading to structural failure. Thus, both the unusually high temperatures and the extraordinary observation of steel-sulfidation (Barnett, 2001) can be accounted for -- if the use of thermate is allowed in the discussion. Note that other oxidizers (like KMnO4) and metals (like titanium and silicon) are commonly used in thermite analogs.

Finally, sulfidation was observed in structural steel samples found from both WTC7 and one of the WTC Towers, as reported in Appendix C in the FEMA report. It is quite possible that more than one type of cutter-charge was involved on 9/11, e.g., HMX, RDX and thermate in some combination. While gypsum in the buildings is a source of sulfur, it is highly unlikely that this sulfur could find its way into the structural steel in such a way as to form a eutectic. The evidence for the use of some variant of thermite such as sulfur-containing thermate in the destruction of the WTC Towers and building 7 is sufficiently compelling to warrant serious investigation.

I understand perfectly that Thermate is NOT a typically used compound in cutter charges or even explosives for use in Controlled Demolition. The reason is that the basic ingredients of Thermate are NOT traceable back to the original manufacturers, which is the reason the inside-job bad guys prepared their own private stash of Thermate for use in these WTC Controlled Demolitions in the first place. These thermite-based shaped charges need not EXPLODE at all, but they are simply high-temperature ‘cutter charges’ designed to ‘cut through structural steel’ columns and beams like a hot knife through butter.

Where did all the sulfur-rich molten iron pools originate, according to your “Building Fires Did It” explanation? :0) Look at the Molten Iron Pool evidence in this video again.

GL,

Terral

 

[DGM]

Hi WildCat:




Shaped charges are explained here where you can see that any of 1000 different explosive types can be utilized. Thermate as an ‘explosive’ is described by Dr. Steven Jones here.

Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?




I understand perfectly that Thermate is NOT a typically used compound in cutter charges or even explosives for use in Controlled Demolition. The reason is that the basic ingredients of Thermate are NOT traceable back to the original manufacturers, which is the reason the inside-job bad guys prepared their own private stash of Thermate for use in these WTC Controlled Demolitions in the first place. These thermite-based shaped charges need not EXPLODE at all, but they are simply high-temperature ‘cutter charges’ designed to ‘cut through structural steel’ columns and beams like a hot knife through butter.

Where did all the sulfur-rich molten iron pools originate, according to your “Building Fires Did It” explanation? :0) Look at the Molten Iron Pool evidence in this video again.

GL,

Terral

Thermite is a incendiary not an explosive. Look it up in something other than a woo site if you dare.

 

[chillzero]

I hate being ignored.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Hi Chillzero:

Chillzero>> I hate being ignored.

Why, did you say something?

Dave

 

[Alferd_Packer]

None of the demolition workers in the picture above climbed up any ladder forty or fifty feet in the air to make that 45-degree angel cut,

Emphasis added.

You are saying that an iron worker climbed up 40 to 50 feet into the air to make a 45-degree angle cut

Pete pointed out your folly with the following:

And if that wasn’t enough for you. . .

And as an added bonus, not the fact that the workers are making a 45 degree cut.

Quit trolling the board with your nonsense.

 

[Terral]

911Truther Calling Debunkers. 911Truther Calling Debunkers. :0)

Hi X:

X >> I realized something today, as I sat bored between classes. Terral has claimed, in this very thread:

1) Steel cannot be weakened or melted by heat untill the whole entire piece of steel has been heated, because the heat transfers instantaneously to all pats of the steel.

2) The steel beams were cut by thermite charges.

The two points listed above are mutually contradictory.

No sir. First of all, you are characterizing my statements and not quoting me in context to anything. Secondly, ‘building fires’ have insufficient energy to weaken or melt WTC-7 structural red-iron columns. The steel-framed network itself carries the energy away from the fuel source more quickly than any proximal steel can be melted. However, all the WTC-7 steel beams and columns could very well be ‘severed’ using a combination of thermite, sulfur-enriched thermate and conventional explosive charges deliberately fixed to achieve that outcome. YOU are arguing for BUILDING FIRES taking down a steel-framed skyscraper in about 6.6 seconds by the severing of ‘all’ steel supports simultaneously, when I am telling you for certain that is very much IMPOSSIBLE. The ONLY way a steel-framed skyscraper of this kind can possibly collapse into its own footprint in just a few seconds is by Controlled Demolition. Period. Have you seen images of building collapsing into a neat little pile from Controlled Demolition? Yes! I have you three examples in the Opening Post. Now YOU are supposed to be proving why this collapse cannot possibly be just another typical Controlled Demolition.

X >> If, as Terral claims, the steel of the building could not be weakened by fire because of the instananeousness of the heat distribution, then how would the heat of a thermite charge be able to cut the beam, unless you had enough thermite to heat the entire building? I'm sure somebody would have noticed that much thermite being placed.

The thermite charges and all the other charges were attached to the vital locations spread all over the steel-framed network, according to my OP explanation. The point you are making is that building fires COULD NOT possibly transfer sufficient heat to ALL the WTC-7 steel members to cause the catastrophic failure of ALL these steel members simultaneously. Buildings like this come down into a little pile every year, but the charges were set to that predetermined outcome.

X >> Honestly, I'm a bit dissapointed in myself that I didn't cotton on to this earlier. I should have caught it. I mean, I'm studying engineering and all. I am shamed.

You are the victim of faulty thinking brought on by the mischaracterization of my WTC-7 explanations. In fact, your comments help make my CD case, even if you fail to realize that today.

X >> Oh, and Terral: Are you going to respond to my point, or, like all other non-compliant evidence you're faced with, will you ignore it?

Far more than half of the posts on this thread contain three sentences of nonsense. Your post received this reply, because you appear to be sincere in your search for the 911Truth. Also, this is my fourth of fifth Board on the list, so others receive a thoughtful reply long before I ever show up here to the debunker site. If you were really in search of the 911Truth, then this really does not seem the right place IMHO. This is where 911Truther’s come to be grilled by debunkers like you.

GL,

Terral

 

[Terral]

Thermite Is The Compound That Starts The Thermate Sulfur-Enriching Process

Hi DGM:

DGM >> Thermite is a incendiary not an explosive. Look it up in something other than a woo site if you dare.

This is the kind of two-sentence drivel that leads MANY astray and right into the jaws of Loyal Bushie LIES.

Jack Hamblin Portland Independent Media Center Article

BYU Physics Prof Finds Thermate in WTC Physical Samples, Building Collapses an Inside Job

Author: Jacob Hamblin

Based on chemical analysis of WTC structural steel residue, a Brigham Young University physics professor has identified the material as Thermate. Thermate is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur. Sulfur causes the thermite to burn hotter, cutting steel quickly and leaving trails of yellow colored residue.

Jack Hamblin’s article shows the same “Confused Fireman” Picture from Christopher Bollyn’s paper that you have already seen described on this thread. Thermite is only the base compound used to begin the Sulfur-enriching Thermate-building process where a long line of incendiary/explosive charges are designed, built and placed part of a predetermined plan. The biggest culprit in identifying the CD signatures is NOT all of the sulfur-rich molten metal pools. The biggest finger pointing to a definite WTC Controlled Demolition is the ‘symmetrical collapse’ itself, when the blueprints show extra steel supports in many WTC locations. That means someone with CD skills was required to set charges with the ‘right amount’ of incendiary/explosive components to allow a very much unsymmetrical skyscraper to fall down symmetrically. That is just one reason why the Architects and Engineers at AE911Truth.org are calling for a new investigation.

GL,

Terral

 

[DGM]

Hi DGM:




This is the kind of two-sentence drivel that leads MANY astray and right into the jaws of Loyal Bushie LIES.

Jack Hamblin Portland Independent Media Center Article




Jack Hamblin’s article shows the same “Confused Fireman” Picture from Christopher Bollyn’s paper that you have already seen described on this thread. Thermite is only the base compound used to begin the Sulfur-enriching Thermate-building process where a long line of incendiary/explosive charges are designed, built and placed part of a predetermined plan. The biggest culprit in identifying the CD signatures is NOT all of the sulfur-rich molten metal pools. The biggest finger pointing to a definite WTC Controlled Demolition is the ‘symmetrical collapse’ itself, when the blueprints show extra steel supports in many WTC locations. That means someone with CD skills was required to set charges with the ‘right amount’ of incendiary/explosive components to allow a very much unsymmetrical skyscraper to fall down symmetrically. That is just one reason why the Architects and Engineers at AE911Truth.org are calling for a new investigation.

GL,

Terral

This is a joke right. Where did you address my simple statement? Thermite/ thermite is an incendiary. Show me the references by demolition companies that say they use it in controlled demolition. They don't and never have (probably never will do to the unpredictable nature of the reaction).

Why do you lie like you do? Do you think people don't notice?

Note; Using Steven Jones as a source to support his own theory is bad form.

 

[CurtC]

Secondly, ‘building fires’ have insufficient energy to weaken or melt WTC-7 structural red-iron columns.

Please stop saying that fires have insufficient energy for anything - you're just showing your ignorance of physics. A fire has as much energy as the amount of fuel used. You want ten times as much energy? Just use ten times as much fuel.