9/11: What really happened on that day?

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
There have been threads in this forum that address the general issue of what happened on 9/11. That being said, I have found that a lot of them are not neutral in their title- their titles imply that they are either for or against an official narrative. I started a thread with the same title as this one in another forum and after over 1000 posts, I think it's been fairly successful. Not sure if it'll work out here, but I thought I'd give it a go. I'll start by responding to someone who asked me to outline my view of what happened on 9/11 and who was behind it...

I've heard many theories as to what happened at the World Trade Center. As to the general outline of what happened on 9/11, I think I'll start with the general outline of both the official narrative of events, as well as the generally accepted outline of what those who disagree with it is, as outlined in a documentary film called Zeitgeist...

***
19 hijackers, directed by Osama Bin Laden, took over 4 commercial jets
with box cutters and, while evading the Air Defense System (NORAD), hit
75% of their targets. In turn, World Trade Towers 1, 2 & 7 collapsed due
to structural failure through fire in a "pancake" fashion, while the
plane that hit the Pentagon vaporized upon impact, as did the plane
that crashed in Shanksville. The 911 Commission found that there were
no warnings for this act of terrorism, while multiple government
failures prevented adequate defense.

***

I would like to ask anyone who sides with the official narrative if they essentially agree with this narrative.

As to what I believe, this is exemplified by the concluding statement of Zeitgeist in its 9/11 section:
***
Criminal Elements within the US government staged a "false flag" rerror
attack on its own citizens, in order to manipulate public perception
into supporting its agenda.

They have been doing these for years.

9/11 was an Inside Job.

***

For anyone considering responding to this thread for the first time, I ask that you consider briefly pointing out what you think happened on 9/11; it can be as simple as stating that you believe in one of the 2 summaries outlined above, or it can be more detailed. At that point, I will endeavour to comment on your entry, and explain why I agree or disagree with your point of view.
 

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,870
Reaction score
6,989
Points
1,815
you made it too long to go POINT BY POINT-----I will note that I never heard that the PLANES VAPORIZED -------it seems logical to me that the one embedded in the PENTAGON was cordoned off and off limits to casual onlookers------nor were tourists permitted to visit the pentagon HOLE IN THE WALL-----and the one that crashed in a field Shanksville was also not OPENED to the public------the broken stuff was COLLECTED by conscientious people who understand what the word CONFIDENTIAL (and KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT) means.
I am willing to believe that building 7 had----already within it----
a DESTRUCT mechanism because it was part of some sort of
governmental-----last resort place and held very top secret stuff------I am willing to believe that since it was damaged---in constituted a risk of PILLAGE of top secret stuff-----THAT I AM WILLING TO BELIEVE------I saw the first building shooting up thick plumes of white smoke-----and gazed at it for what seemed like more than an hour before it collapsed. No evidence of IMPLOSION----just collapse after a long time----
I saw the plane hit building two-----did not seem much of a feat------one could see those buildings FOR MANY MILES around--------all the way into Jersey---from Staten Island, all of Manhattan and Brooklyn------a very big target. Anyone who planned that for mind manipulation would have to be out of his (their) mind-----it just was not WORTH IT
 

LA RAM FAN

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
35,380
Reaction score
5,177
Points
1,130
there you go with your obsession on 9/11 again I see.

I know am one to talk with my user name and all since I at one time was the same a couple years after the event but the difference in you and me though is "I" at least got wise and listened to other posters back then after arguing about it for a few months with all these paid shills they have planted on message boards everywhere such as candyass "and NOW Irose the lastest shill after my last post." They gave me excellent advise back then that i eventually wised up and followed their lead on which was-:trolls:

but MOST importantly,took their advise when they told me-9/11 is the LEAST of our problems we have to worry about from the government right now.

They are doing and plotting far more sinister events against us right now.THATS what americans need to be concerned about. whats going on RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!

This goes through one ear and out the other with you everytime though when i say-"9/11 is like the JFK assassination.done and over with.

same as the JFK assassination,nothing can be done about it as far as bringing the REAL killers in washington running our country to justice.move on already.:rolleyes:"

For years I went back and forth on the net with people who defended the warren report that oswald was the lone assassin not realising they knew just as we as I did there was a conspiracy with multiple shooters and there was no evidence against him.

I wised up and moved on to trying to do something about whats going on NOW. I see you are still obviously stuck in the past same as I once was on JFK though.

I can only try and lead the horse to the water so many times.

see "I" HEARD THEIR words back then they spoke to me on 9/11. it was THEIR words that sunk in with me when I would discuss 9/11 all the time with them.THEY game the wise advise saying "Dude,9/11 is like the JFK assassination.done and over with.nothing will ever be dome about it so what do you hope to achiever trying to convince people you speak the truth? you should be worried about whats going on NOW."

See I am just repeating wise words THEY said to ME back then that I eventually took their wise advise on and wisely followed their lead and wisdom on.

you might try and do the same.
 
Last edited:

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,870
Reaction score
6,989
Points
1,815
do not worry ---INSIDEJOB----there are effective medications for that which AILS you--------the thoughts will be tempered and fade
 

Freewill

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
31,158
Reaction score
5,059
Points
1,130
My thoughts, it would be too big and too many people involved for it to be an inside job. We know for pretty much fact that two planes hit the WTCs. The pentagon not so much but eye witnesses indicate a jet did hit the petagon. We know that WTC7 burned for many hours before it collasped. Now if it were rigged with explosives were they put in before the fires, risking damage or during the fires risking personel? Logically the same structural fault that cause WTC1 and 2 to fall would cause WTC 7 to also fall.

So when someone tells me where the people went who were supposedly on the plane. I am going with it was a cleaver plan cooked up and carried out by 19 murderers.

The simplest answer is almost always the best answer.
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
you made it too long to go POINT BY POINT-----I will note that I never heard that the PLANES VAPORIZED -------it seems logical to me that the one embedded in the PENTAGON was cordoned off and off limits to casual onlookers------nor were tourists permitted to visit the pentagon HOLE IN THE WALL-----
Technically, Popular Mechanics says that the majority of the plane was liquified rather then vaporized. I imagine Zeitgeist said vaporized, because liquid metal doesn't just disappear into thin air after the event. Here's the quote from Popular Mechanics:
**Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."**

Source: Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - The Pentagon

and the one that crashed in a field Shanksville was also not OPENED to the public------the broken stuff was COLLECTED by conscientious people who understand what the word CONFIDENTIAL (and KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT) means.
Apparently, not everyone kept their mouth shut:
**"This crash was different. There was no wreckage, no bodies, and no noise."
- Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller [1]

"I was looking for anything that said tail, wing, plane, metal. There was nothing."
- Photographer Scott Spangler [2]

"I was amazed because it did not, in any way, shape, or form, look like a plane crash."
- Patrick Madigan, commander of the Somerset barracks
of the Pennsylvania State Police [3]**

Source: Shanksville, Pennsylvania, on 9/11: The Mysterious Plane Crash Site Without a Plane | 911Blogger.com


I am willing to believe that building 7 had----already within it----
a DESTRUCT mechanism because it was part of some sort of
governmental-----last resort place and held very top secret stuff------I am willing to believe that since it was damaged---in constituted a risk of PILLAGE of top secret stuff-----THAT I AM WILLING TO BELIEVE------
It's nice to know that you are at least willing to entertain the notion that not everything we were told by the U.S. government is true. Even Fox News admitted that Larry Silverstein had -wanted- to pull the building and had asked for approval to do so. Larry denies having actually done it though:
**Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.

A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option. There was no secret. There was no conspiracy.
**

The article then goes on to deny that it actually happened, but I believe there is lots of evidence that it did, in fact, happen.

Source: Shame On Jesse Ventura! | Fox News

I saw the first building shooting up thick plumes of white smoke-----and gazed at it for what seemed like more than an hour before it collapsed. No evidence of IMPLOSION----just collapse after a long time----
Most of us are not demolition experts. That being said, even some news reporters thought that the Twin Towers may well have been taken down in controlled demolitions. The following video clip was taken as reporters were reporting live when the first Twin Tower (Building 2 or the South Tower) collapsed. You'll see that the reporter right away suspected a controlled demolition:

I myself actually believed the official story for around 2 years, after which I read a book by a writer who has written extensively on controversial subjects, starting with the JFK assassination (his book was one of the 2 references for Oliver Stone's JFK film). Another point: the collapse of the Twin Towers was rather unusual for controlled demolitions, in that the collapse initiated in the top portion, rather then at the bottom. It is more difficult to successfully demolish a building this way, but it is doable, and has been done on a smaller scale. WTC 7 collapsed in the normal demolition fashion, from the bottom up. It seems that for this reason, a Danish demolition expert had no problem calling it a controlled demolition when he first saw it, not realizing that it had collapsed on 9/11 along with the twin towers:

I saw the plane hit building two-----did not seem much of a feat------
On TV, or with your own eyes?

one could see those buildings FOR MANY MILES around--------all the way into Jersey---from Staten Island, all of Manhattan and Brooklyn------a very big target. Anyone who planned that for mind manipulation would have to be out of his (their) mind-----it just was not WORTH IT
Not sure what you mean by mind manipulation...
 
Last edited:

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,870
Reaction score
6,989
Points
1,815
the OPINION OF A NEWS REPORTER???? ROFLMAO ----
the damnthing DID NOT IMPLODE----it collapsed top down
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
there you go with your obsession on 9/11 again I see.

I know am one to talk with my user name and all since I at one time was the same a couple years after the event but the difference in you and me though is "I" at least got wise and listened to other posters back then after arguing about it for a few months with all these paid shills they have planted on message boards everywhere such as candyass "and NOW Irose the lastest shill after my last post." They gave me excellent advise back then that i eventually wised up and followed their lead on which was-:trolls:
You and I don't agree that there is a vast network of paid shills. I can certainly agree that there are -some-, but I think they are far less in number then you might think. irosie's posted over 38,000 posts in USMessageBoard; this is the first time I've seen her here. My guess is she decided to take a peek in this forum and may have already decided it's not for her.

but MOST importantly,took their advise when they told me-9/11 is the LEAST of our problems we have to worry about from the government right now.

They are doing and plotting far more sinister events against us right now. THATS what americans need to be concerned about. whats going on RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!

This goes through one ear and out the other with you everytime though when i say-"9/11 is like the JFK assassination.done and over with.

same as the JFK assassination,nothing can be done about it as far as bringing the REAL killers in washington running our country to justice.move on already.:rolleyes:"
I'm not so sure about that. But I don't discuss it solely to bring justice to the real perpetrators of 9/11. I also discuss it because I think it's a good example of a false flag operation. If people can be persuaded, even a little, that 9/11 may have been a false flag operation, they will be more wary of trusting the mass media's reports of important events.

For years I went back and forth on the net with people who defended the warren report that oswald was the lone assassin, not realizing they knew just as I did there was a conspiracy with multiple shooters and there was no evidence against him.

I wised up and moved on to trying to do something about whats going on NOW.
I'm sorry 9/11, but just because you believed that they "knew just as I did" that there was a conspiracy. I think people on both sides of the fence when it comes to important events like the JFK assassination or 9/11 have an unfortunate tendency to jump to conclusions as to what members of the other side of the fence know or do not know, frequently leading to both sides accusing the other side of lying. It can be quite tiresome, especially when you're on the receiving end -.-. It also has the tendency of raising the emotions of those being accused, and making it more difficult to actually discuss the evidence, instead of speculating on the motivations of those discussing the subject.

I see you are still obviously stuck in the past same as I once was on JFK though.

I can only try and lead the horse to the water so many times.
Laugh :p. Historians still argue over what happened millennia ago (the historical Jesus, for instance). Compared to that, 9/11 is an issue that is still quite fresh :p.
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
do not worry ---INSIDEJOB----there are effective medications for that which AILS you--------the thoughts will be tempered and fade
Somehow, I don't think that's going to go over too well :p.
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
My thoughts, it would be too big and too many people involved for it to be an inside job.
How many people do you think would need to be involved?

We know for pretty much fact that two planes hit the WTCs.
I'm not so sure. I -used- to think that was the case. Then I saw September Clues...

Perhaps 2 aircraft hit the Twin Towers, but I'm not sure they were commercial aircraft...

The pentagon not so much but eye witnesses indicate a jet did hit the pentagon.
I can certainly agree that some eye witnesses -thought- they saw a jet hit the Pentagon. That being said, I think there's a lot of evidence that this didn't happen. We have a thread here that deals exclusively with the Pentagon attack, it is here:
911 Pentagon - 757 or cruise missile???

We know that WTC7 burned for many hours before it collasped. Now if it were rigged with explosives were they put in before the fires, risking damage or during the fires risking personel? Logically the same structural fault that cause WTC1 and 2 to fall would cause WTC 7 to also fall.
If by "structural fault", you mean explosives, sure :p. No steel framed building has collapsed into their own footprint before or after 9/11 without the use of explosives. Not only were explosives used, but they had to installed very carefully. Controlled demolitions frequently go wrong:

So when someone tells me where the people went who were supposedly on the plane. I am going with it was a clever plan cooked up and carried out by 19 murderers.
The best theory I've got so far is explained in the following thread:
The "4" Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them? | Let's Roll Forums

It's a lot of reading, but if you're interested, there it is...

The simplest answer is almost always the best answer.
Propagandists the world over rely on precisely this type of logic.
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,870
Reaction score
6,989
Points
1,815
the OPINION OF A NEWS REPORTER???? ROFLMAO ----
the damnthing DID NOT IMPLODE----it collapsed top down
It is certainly more difficult to demolish a building from the top down. That being said, 9/11 wouldn't be the only time this has been done...
New Video Shows that Demolitions are Sometimes Top-Down | George Washington's Blog
ok---BOTH tower 1 and 2----just happened to be struck by jets----just happened to BURN, SPIT and SPUTTER and get so hot from the top-----and moving down for hours----so that people were JUMPING out of the windows-----and then-----mysteriously------some one pushed the buttons for the
"controlled demolitions" -----WATTA PLAN
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
the OPINION OF A NEWS REPORTER???? ROFLMAO ----
the damnthing DID NOT IMPLODE----it collapsed top down
It is certainly more difficult to demolish a building from the top down. That being said, 9/11 wouldn't be the only time this has been done...
New Video Shows that Demolitions are Sometimes Top-Down | George Washington's Blog
ok---BOTH tower 1 and 2----just happened to be struck by jets----just happened to BURN, SPIT and SPUTTER and get so hot from the top-----and moving down for hours----so that people were JUMPING out of the windows-----and then-----mysteriously------some one pushed the buttons for the
"controlled demolitions" -----WATTA PLAN
There were certainly fires capable of burning people, thus the jumping, but not nearly hot enough melt the buildings. As to what happened, it can only be explained by controlled demolitions. I'm not an architect or an engineer, but Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have listed 10 pieces of key evidence that the Twin Towers were taken down by controlled demolition. Namely:
  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
Source: AE911Truth — Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11 - Evidence
 

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,870
Reaction score
6,989
Points
1,815
the OPINION OF A NEWS REPORTER???? ROFLMAO ----
the damnthing DID NOT IMPLODE----it collapsed top down
It is certainly more difficult to demolish a building from the top down. That being said, 9/11 wouldn't be the only time this has been done...
New Video Shows that Demolitions are Sometimes Top-Down | George Washington's Blog
ok---BOTH tower 1 and 2----just happened to be struck by jets----just happened to BURN, SPIT and SPUTTER and get so hot from the top-----and moving down for hours----so that people were JUMPING out of the windows-----and then-----mysteriously------some one pushed the buttons for the
"controlled demolitions" -----WATTA PLAN
There were certainly fires capable of burning people, thus the jumping, but not nearly hot enough melt the buildings. As to what happened, it can only be explained by controlled demolitions. I'm not an architect or an engineer, but Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have listed 10 pieces of key evidence that the Twin Towers were taken down by controlled demolition. Namely:
  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
Source: AE911Truth — Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11 - Evidence
not impressed
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
the OPINION OF A NEWS REPORTER???? ROFLMAO ----
the damnthing DID NOT IMPLODE----it collapsed top down
It is certainly more difficult to demolish a building from the top down. That being said, 9/11 wouldn't be the only time this has been done...
New Video Shows that Demolitions are Sometimes Top-Down | George Washington's Blog
ok---BOTH tower 1 and 2----just happened to be struck by jets----just happened to BURN, SPIT and SPUTTER and get so hot from the top-----and moving down for hours----so that people were JUMPING out of the windows-----and then-----mysteriously------some one pushed the buttons for the
"controlled demolitions" -----WATTA PLAN
There were certainly fires capable of burning people, thus the jumping, but not nearly hot enough melt the buildings. As to what happened, it can only be explained by controlled demolitions. I'm not an architect or an engineer, but Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have listed 10 pieces of key evidence that the Twin Towers were taken down by controlled demolition. Namely:
  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
Source: AE911Truth — Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11 - Evidence
not impressed
Are you either an architect or an engineer?
 

yiostheoy

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Messages
20,876
Reaction score
1,930
Points
290
Wacko conspiracists like this go straight to my ignore list.
 

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,870
Reaction score
6,989
Points
1,815
the OPINION OF A NEWS REPORTER???? ROFLMAO ----
the damnthing DID NOT IMPLODE----it collapsed top down
It is certainly more difficult to demolish a building from the top down. That being said, 9/11 wouldn't be the only time this has been done...
New Video Shows that Demolitions are Sometimes Top-Down | George Washington's Blog
ok---BOTH tower 1 and 2----just happened to be struck by jets----just happened to BURN, SPIT and SPUTTER and get so hot from the top-----and moving down for hours----so that people were JUMPING out of the windows-----and then-----mysteriously------some one pushed the buttons for the
"controlled demolitions" -----WATTA PLAN
There were certainly fires capable of burning people, thus the jumping, but not nearly hot enough melt the buildings. As to what happened, it can only be explained by controlled demolitions. I'm not an architect or an engineer, but Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have listed 10 pieces of key evidence that the Twin Towers were taken down by controlled demolition. Namely:
  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
Source: AE911Truth — Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11 - Evidence
not impressed
Are you either an architect or an engineer?
I am a brilliant woman-----I remember the concepts of..... are you ready? .......well----here it is.......***FLASH POINT*** ----
and-----***EXOTHERMIC REACTION**** from high school
chemistry and---chemistry 101-2----

uhm----not enough DEBRIS? see above and ------were you
in the city when it was over hung for days with particulate crap
in the sky? "thermite" ?-----that's just oxidized iron (AKA----
~~~rust. I got some of it on my iron skillet.
In sum----think----really high temperatures----NOT FROM THE
BURNING FUELS--------that was just the starter------consider
the PLASTICS
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
It is certainly more difficult to demolish a building from the top down. That being said, 9/11 wouldn't be the only time this has been done...
New Video Shows that Demolitions are Sometimes Top-Down | George Washington's Blog
ok---BOTH tower 1 and 2----just happened to be struck by jets----just happened to BURN, SPIT and SPUTTER and get so hot from the top-----and moving down for hours----so that people were JUMPING out of the windows-----and then-----mysteriously------some one pushed the buttons for the
"controlled demolitions" -----WATTA PLAN
There were certainly fires capable of burning people, thus the jumping, but not nearly hot enough melt the buildings. As to what happened, it can only be explained by controlled demolitions. I'm not an architect or an engineer, but Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have listed 10 pieces of key evidence that the Twin Towers were taken down by controlled demolition. Namely:
  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
Source: AE911Truth — Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11 - Evidence
not impressed
Are you either an architect or an engineer?
I am a brilliant woman-----I remember the concepts of..... are you ready? .......well----here it is.......***FLASH POINT*** ----
and-----***EXOTHERMIC REACTION**** from high school
chemistry and---chemistry 101-2----
I know that an exothermic reaction is a chemical reaction that releases energy by light or heat. I imagine you're bringing this up because of the mention of thermite incendiaries on steel beams?

uhm----not enough DEBRIS? see above and
Could you explain what you're referring to here?

------were you
in the city when it was over hung for days with particulate crap
in the sky?
I wasn't, no. Were you?

"thermite" ?-----that's just oxidized iron (AKA----
~~~rust.
Not quite. Google defines it as: "a mixture of finely powdered aluminum and iron oxide that produces a very high temperature on combustion, used in welding and for incendiary bombs."


In sum----think----really high temperatures----NOT FROM THE
BURNING FUELS--------that was just the starter------consider
the PLASTICS
Let me guess, you're going with NIST's explanation that "The fuel for the fires was ordinary office combustibles at ordinary combustible load levels", that it? It wouldn't explain the molten metal, which is why possibly why both the 9/11 Commission and NIST both ignored it...
Molten metal under Trade Center rubble could NOT have come from jet fuel | Truth and Shadows
 

irosie91

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
71,870
Reaction score
6,989
Points
1,815
ok---BOTH tower 1 and 2----just happened to be struck by jets----just happened to BURN, SPIT and SPUTTER and get so hot from the top-----and moving down for hours----so that people were JUMPING out of the windows-----and then-----mysteriously------some one pushed the buttons for the
"controlled demolitions" -----WATTA PLAN
There were certainly fires capable of burning people, thus the jumping, but not nearly hot enough melt the buildings. As to what happened, it can only be explained by controlled demolitions. I'm not an architect or an engineer, but Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have listed 10 pieces of key evidence that the Twin Towers were taken down by controlled demolition. Namely:
  1. Rapid onset of destruction,
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
Source: AE911Truth — Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11 - Evidence
not impressed
Are you either an architect or an engineer?
I am a brilliant woman-----I remember the concepts of..... are you ready? .......well----here it is.......***FLASH POINT*** ----
and-----***EXOTHERMIC REACTION**** from high school
chemistry and---chemistry 101-2----
I know that an exothermic reaction is a chemical reaction that releases energy by light or heat. I imagine you're bringing this up because of the mention of thermite incendiaries on steel beams?

uhm----not enough DEBRIS? see above and
Could you explain what you're referring to here?

------were you
in the city when it was over hung for days with particulate crap
in the sky?
I wasn't, no. Were you?

"thermite" ?-----that's just oxidized iron (AKA----
~~~rust.
Not quite. Google defines it as: "a mixture of finely powdered aluminum and iron oxide that produces a very high temperature on combustion, used in welding and for incendiary bombs."


In sum----think----really high temperatures----NOT FROM THE
BURNING FUELS--------that was just the starter------consider
the PLASTICS
Let me guess, you're going with NIST's explanation that "The fuel for the fires was ordinary office combustibles at ordinary combustible load levels", that it? It wouldn't explain the molten metal, which is why possibly why both the 9/11 Commission and NIST both ignored it...
Molten metal under Trade Center rubble could NOT have come from jet fuel | Truth and Shadows
of course not----"ordinary office combustible"----EXTRAORDINARY office combustible----things that would not
START burning until their VERY HIGH flashpoint is reached.
No question ---in an ordinary fire---in which wood and --paper burns up----things like metal may just get hot but NOT MELT---
In a fire which is the result of a plane CRASHING thru a building and sustained by jet fuel---the ENERGY LEVELS are much higher than the burning of a bed mattress or a wooden table----the MUCH HIGHER ENERGY levers means MUCH HIGH HEAT-------those levels heat reach the flash points of things that DO NOT ORDINARILY BURN ----sometimes melt but DO NOT BURN-----when plastic burns that CHEMICAL REACTION is extreme exothermic (ie produces MORE HEAT). As the FLASH POINTS of various materials are reached they BURN----their burning produces PROGRESSIVELY MORE HEAT------and those heat levels do
melt metals
 
OP
phoenyx

phoenyx

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2016
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
116
Points
95
Location
Canada
In sum----think----really high temperatures----NOT FROM THE
BURNING FUELS--------that was just the starter------consider
the PLASTICS
Let me guess, you're going with NIST's explanation that "The fuel for the fires was ordinary office combustibles at ordinary combustible load levels", that it? It wouldn't explain the molten metal, which is possibly why both the 9/11 Commission and NIST both ignored it...
Molten metal under Trade Center rubble could NOT have come from jet fuel | Truth and Shadows
of course not----"ordinary office combustible"----EXTRAORDINARY office combustible----things that would not
START burning until their VERY HIGH flashpoint is reached.
No question ---in an ordinary fire---in which wood and --paper burns up----things like metal may just get hot but NOT MELT---
In a fire which is the result of a plane CRASHING thru a building and sustained by jet fuel---the ENERGY LEVELS are much higher than the burning of a bed mattress or a wooden table----the MUCH HIGHER ENERGY levers means MUCH HIGH HEAT-------those levels heat reach the flash points of things that DO NOT ORDINARILY BURN ----sometimes melt but DO NOT BURN-----when plastic burns that CHEMICAL REACTION is extreme exothermic (ie produces MORE HEAT). As the FLASH POINTS of various materials are reached they BURN----their burning produces PROGRESSIVELY MORE HEAT------and those heat levels do melt metals
I've never seen an article that supports this notion of yours. Could you provide one?
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top