911 Towers Were Exploded Outwards, Not Collapsed

[Martingale]

His own words say "I've been marked down as a paid disinfo agent of the NWO. "This is TRUE"..............so I say your either a paid disinfo agent or a Liar, either one can't be trusted

do you think the NWO has you on their to-be-arrested lists? I know the answer, but I'm not telling.

 

[spiritman1]

Its cute how internet forum posters are always convinced that the NWO cares enough about their opinions to hire "paid disinfo agent" to stymie them.

exactly thats whats the presidents for!.... when he addressed the public after 911 and told the American public not to believe in crazy conspiracy theories, no matter how much evidence they bring to the table

 

[ManFromUncle]

My eyes see a partial view of a building collapsing. That's it. I don't hear any detonations going off prior to or doing the collapse. I refer to the experts on this because they are...well, experts..

Then you need glasses. Does this look like a "partial" collapse? WTC 7 in center, never hit by a plane, went straight down symmetrically at free fall speed:

But guess what it gets even better. Someone seems to have fed to teleprompter script to a reporter 23 minutes too soon and she said in a LIVE SHOT that WTC7 had collapsed when you could see it standing right behind her. Go figure, here is the vid:
YouTube - ‪New NEWS - BBC Video - WTC 7 - Prior Knowledge‬‏

More info on BBC flub:
Context of '4:54 p.m.-5:10 p.m. September 11, 2001: BBC Reports WTC 7 Collapse Before It Happens'


What was in WTC 7? Rudy Giuliani's Emergency Command Center, with a hardened bunker on the 23rd floor, also offices for the Dept. of Defense, SEC, CIA and Secret Service. Speculated to be the command bunker for the job which is why it had to go down. Oh yes, also destroyed were records for ongoing investigations into Enron and Worldcom:

from 911review.com

Before the attack, SEC investigations of corporate fraud by companies such as Enron and Worldcom were the subject of many news reports -- reports that virtually vanished in the wake of the attack.

I'm still waiting for you to answer my question regarding the $2.3 trillion myth. How were they able to steal $2.3 trillion from $389 billion? Now, answer it. If you can't, then quit repeating the myth.

So you agree Donald Rumsfeld should be in jail? Let's subpoena him and ask him those questions. Here's your "myth" LOL:
YouTube - ‪Rumsfeld 2.3 Trillion Dollars missing Pentagon 1 DAY b4/911‬‏

MAIN SITE: THE TOWERS WERE EXPLODED OUTWARD, NOT COLLAPSED

http://busharchives.org/911/

 

[Btodd]

@ManFromUncle:

You've never addressed how these powerful explosions were so quiet, nor how thermite is supposed to:

1. Leave molten metal for weeks
2. Sever vertical columns, in perfectly-timed succession to make it appear like it collapsed from the top-down, since it uses gravity to 'melt' through its target (like an acid would)
3. Survive the impact of the planes and ensuing fires and still work
4. How any of this was installed, what mechanism would be used
5. How much thermite would be needed to accomplish this
6. A single example of thermite ever being used to demolish a skyscraper, after saying it's 'old hat in demolitions'

Also, still asking (this is at least the 5th time now) for you to answer the question, 'Why did the 2nd building to be hit collapse FIRST?'.


Btodd

 

[circa02]

Also, still asking (this is at least the 5th time now) for you to answer the question, 'Why did the 2nd building to be hit collapse FIRST?'.

I don't know why you think any of us would know.

 

[circa02]

Someone asked previously where's the firefighters for 9/11 truth: YouTube - ‪FirefightersFor911TRUTH.org - Erik Lawyer - Press Conference‬‏

 

[Btodd]

Someone asked previously where's the firefighters for 9/11 truth: YouTube - ‪FirefightersFor911TRUTH.org - Erik Lawyer - Press Conference‬‏

He specified '9/11 firefighters' for a reason.


Btodd

 

[circa02]

He specified '9/11 firefighters' for a reason.

Which means what?

 

[Btodd]

He specified '9/11 firefighters' for a reason.

Which means what?

Which means, when you guys post a video of the 9/11 firefighters talking about the collapse, and refer to it as if they were talking about a demolition...none of those guys are 9/11 Truthers. I'm pretty sure that was oldbetang's point, but he can clarify if necessary.


Btodd

 

[circa02]

Their organization is called Firefighters for 9-11 Truth.

 

[Btodd]

Their organization is called Firefighters for 9-11 Truth.

Surely, you understand the distinction I'm making. It's not that 'no firefighters anywhere are 9/11 Truthers', it's that 'no NYC Firefighters that were there on 9/11 are 9/11 Truthers', including every single person in the video that both you and ManFromUncle have posted, trying to imply that a controlled demolition happened.


Btodd

 

[circa02]

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand what your point is. Just because I'm a "truther", a phrase I hate btw, I don't pretend to have even half the answers, I ask questions.

 

[ManFromUncle]

Surely, you understand the distinction I'm making. It's not that 'no firefighters anywhere are 9/11 Truthers', it's that 'no NYC Firefighters that were there on 9/11 are 9/11 Truthers', including every single person in the video that both you and ManFromUncle have posted, trying to imply that a controlled demolition happened.


Btodd

Yes they are "trying to imply that controlled demolition happened." Go ahead ignore this one too!

FIREFIGHTERS FOR 911 TRUTH:

NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) 921, which is the National Standard for Fire and Explosion Investigations, very clearly indicates in numerous sections that the possibility of explosives should have been thoroughly investigated. Specifically in NFPA 921 18.3.2

High Order Damage -

“High-order damage is characterized by shattering of the structure, producing small, pulverized debris. Walls, roofs, and structural members are splintered or shattered, with the building completely demolished. Debris is thrown great distances, possibly hundreds of feet. High-order damage is the result of rapid rates of pressure rise.” World Trade Center’s 1, 2, and 7 all clearly met this definition; therefore they should have been thoroughly investigated and analyzed for explosives. Specifically, the use of “exotic accelerants” should have been investigated. In NFPA 921 19.2.4

-”Exotic Accelerants,” three indicators were clearly met that should have led to a thorough investigation in to the possible use of “exotic accelerants,” specifically as stated in the guideline, “Thermite mixtures.”
So, why was the possibility of explosives, controlled demolition, or the use of “exotic accelerants” not thoroughly investigated, or even mentioned in the 9-11 Commission Report?

Fire Fighters For 9-11 Truth » About Us

MAIN SITE: THE TOWERS WERE EXPLODED OUTWARD, NOT COLLAPSED

http://busharchives.org/911/

 

[Btodd]

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand what your point is. Just because I'm a "truther", a phrase I hate btw, I don't pretend to have even half the answers, I ask questions.

As long as you ask questions from both proposed explanations (which would include anything ManFromUncle posts), I'm fine with that.

The point is that nobody on the NY Fire Department, who were actually there that day and in a position to know, think that the collapse of the buildings was due to a controlled demolition.

Both you, and ManFromUncle, have posted a video of NYC firefighters talking about the collapse, with the intention of implying that they're talking about a controlled demolition. Since none of them are 9/11 Truthers; the point you're trying to make with that video is false.


Btodd

 

[circa02]

The point is that nobody on the NY Fire Department, who were actually there that day and in a position to know, think that the collapse of the buildings was due to a controlled demolition.

You know this how?

 

[oldbetang]

Then you need glasses. Does this look like a "partial" collapse? WTC 7 in center, never hit by a plane, went straight down symmetrically at free fall speed:

I don't need glasses. You need to pay attention. I never said that there was a partial collapse. I said that what I saw was a partial view of the WTC 7 collapsing. That is, that the entire building was not in view from top to bottom. All that we see in the videos is the top few floors as they begin their descent.

So you agree Donald Rumsfeld should be in jail?

For what? What exactly is he accused of?

Here's your "myth" LOL:

Where? Where is it shown that $2.3 trillion was stolen ? Who was even making that claim? Certainly not Rumsfeld. Who has been accused of stealing the $2.3 trillion? Certainly not Rumsfeld. Most importantly, how can $2.3 trillion be stolen from $289 billion? Explain how that is even possible. $289 billion was the total amount alloted for Defense in 2001.

 

[Btodd]

The point is that nobody on the NY Fire Department, who were actually there that day and in a position to know, think that the collapse of the buildings was due to a controlled demolition.

You know this how?

Because none of them have said so. If your point is that 'well, maybe some of them believe that, but haven't said so', then you can't know that, and have no business posting a video of them talking about the collapse to imply such a thing.

I have often wondered if people who try to imply that conclusion from their words would say that to their face, instead of from behind an anonymous keyboard on a computer.


Btodd

 

[oldbetang]

Also, still asking (this is at least the 5th time now) for you to answer the question, 'Why did the 2nd building to be hit collapse FIRST?'.

I don't know why you think any of us would know.

You should know. It isn't rocket science. What was the weight of the structure above the impact zone of the 2nd hit as compared to the weight of the structure above the impact zone of the 1st hit?

 

[Btodd]

You should know. It isn't rocket science. What was the weight of the structure above the impact zone of the 2nd hit as compared to the weight of the structure above the impact zone of the 1st hit?

Exactly. The 'official explanation' conforms to basic physics, and the thermite hypothesis does not...nor can anyone who proposes it be bothered to answer a single, simple question about how thermite accomplishes the task.

And I will continue to ask.


Btodd

 

[Btodd]

Here's what you should do. When trying to figure out what happened, ask tough questions of both sides, and see what their answers are. Compare the answers for explanatory power, and see which one explains the facts, without resorting to the most assumptions.

Since nobody can explain how thermite does these things, then only one mechanism actually explains the collapses. And it just happens to be the one that involves basic physics, and is supported by peer-reviewed science.

Thermite is not a magic substance. The word itself does not explain how the buildings collapsed in the slightest.

Look up Occam's Razor for more clarification.


Btodd