TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11?
Pages (162): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 »

Just as it's wrong to find complicated conspiracy where simple incompetence will explain everything, it's also wrong to presume evil motives where simple mental retardation may be the explanation.

Loose Change didn't invent the 9/11 conspiracy. The conspiracy theories started loooong before 9/11, because there is a core group of people out there who quite simply believe every conspiracy theory ever suspected, ever, by anybody.

For instance, the Loose Change guys actually guest hosted a talk radio show recently. When a caller suggested that we should be more worried about the government controlling the weather, the guys agreed that of course the government has weather control machines but this 9/11 thing is also important. Hey, why not.

Now, fans of this site know, I don't be trustin' me no government. I've put in time at various intelligence agencies and at one major government contractor (Kellogg, Brown & Root). I've worked for these people and let me tell you, the government is a mess. And elected officials, don't get me started on those people. They'll do anything it takes to get votes.

But here's the thing. The 9/11 "Truth" guys, the Loose Changers and all the many websites, they don't just think government is corrupt. They think everybody, and I mean everybody, is either evil on a demonic scale, or a mindless sheep.

For instance, how much money would it take to get you to kill 3,000 random, innocent Americans? Or, say you stumbled upon somebody else's plan to kill 3,000 innocent Americans. How much would it take to get you to stay silent afterward?

A hundred dollars? Two hundred? Two hundred fifty?

Well if the conspiracy guys are right, there are people reading this right now who took that deal. No kidding.

Here's why. The entire 9/11 "Truth" movement rests on the idea that the World Trade Center towers were rigged with explosives, a "Controlled Demolition" like you see with old buildings. That's the whole thing. They say the buildings couldn't have come down otherwise.

Forget the fact that no experts on the subject agree with them. That's not the point right now. We're just trying to get inside these guys' heads.

Now, maybe you could keep the plan itself a secret. A few dozen murderous black ops guys, demolitions experts with a grudge against the USA, maybe they've been brainwashed. Who knows. Maybe it could be done. People point out that the Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb was kept a secret, so why not this?

But the cover-up. Holy shit, guys. Covering this thing up after the fact would be like trying to keep the atomic bomb a secret after Hiroshima. Just wait 'till you hear this.

First, picture the demolitions teams wiring up the World Trade Center towers with explosives prior to the attack. Obviously you couldn't do it during business hours, since it'd be kind of hard to explain to the 100,000 people who worked at or visited the WTC towers on any given day why you had a huge chunk of wall torn out and were wiring up a bomb on the steel beams there.

I mean, keep in mind, I don't know how big of a job that would be (no one has ever demolished a building that size before) but a building just half the size of one WTC tower took 4,000 separate charges to bring down. Four thousand.

That job took seven months of prep work... and they had the run of an abandoned building, without having to hide their work from 100,000 people every day. Our demolition crew, on the other hand, can work only at night and has to spend the last bit of every shift carefully repairing the wall and hiding any evidence of charges or detonators as not to be discovered during the day.

Huge teams of demolitions experts, who had no problem wiring a building full of innocent New Yorkers to explode, hired in secret, worked every night for what had to be a year (and that's only if they had a big enough crew) placing maybe 10,000 separate charges in each tower and another few thousand in WTC 7 (the smaller WTC tower that also collapsed, later in the day on 9/11).

And nobody notices.

That's right. That's the theory they're putting out there. 100,000 DVD's they've sold with this.

Truckloads of bombs, dozens of mysterious workers, going in and out of the building, night after night. Security at the building doesn't catch them, Port Authority Police don't catch them, random eyewitnesses who stumble across the operation and call the cops don't catch them, maintenance workers who stumble across wet paint and repaired walls and bits of strange wire don't catch them, security cameras don't catch them.

The bomb-sniffing dogs who were brought in from time to time (remember, these buildings were bombed by terrorists in 1993) who are trained to find even one bomb, fail to notice the 10,000 bombs lining their building.

If you're saying that nothing could possibly be more retarded than that, you're wrong.

No, they're just getting started. It's at this stage of the hypothetical plot when the 9/11 conspiracy guys say the real cover-up began. This is when all of the many, many people who could have blown the lid off the whole thing chose to stay silent because they were paid off by the government.

That includes hundreds of private researchers and government employees who prepared gigantic reports about the collapse of the towers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Also, officials in the New York City Fire Department.

All were written fat checks, say the conspiracy guys, to cover up the murder of 3,000 New Yorkers. Keep in mind, some of them were New Yorkers themselves - all of the FDNY guys were - and some of them had friends who died in the towers. The theory even says it was the commander of the FDNY itself who detonated one of the buildings, and therefore he was in on the decision to kill 343 of his own firefighters and 60 police officers.


For money. If that were you... how big would that check have to be? These are people he saw every day, worked with every day. He went to weddings, birthday parties, to baseball games with these guys. In the mind of the 9/11 conspiracy, he'd kill them all for a big enough pile of cash.

Would you?

There's more. We have hundreds, if not thousands, of reporters and writers who researched the collapse, including the nine reporters and dozens of experts for the huge Popular Mechanics article on the subject.

They were paid off, too. And paid enough to walk away from the story of a lifetime, a chance to blow the lid off the conspiracy. Paid enough to refuse a sure Pulitzer and a lifetime of fame and riches as one of history's greatest heroes. And paid in such a way that no other reporters would notice and get jealous or ask questions. These people do tend to be the curious type, you know.

We're getting a nice sized payroll here. Now let's add in the hundreds of people from a dozen different agencies and police departments who claim to have helped clean up flight 93 wreckage, including 300 volunteers. The conspiracy guys say there was no plane, therefore they were paid to lie, along with all of the witnesses in Pennsylvania who claim to have seen the plane go down.

But wait, there's more. Because there are hundreds of thousands of civil engineers and structural engineers in the world (people who are experts in what makes buildings fall down) and lots of demolitions experts. Approximately zero of them say the 9/11 attacks looked like bombed buildings. All of them either say outright that the demolition theory is asinine, or are silent in the face of what the Loose Changers say is video proof of mass murder so obvious even an uneducated jackass off the street can spot it.

The conspiracy guys' explanation?

You guessed it. They were paid to stay silent. Hey, why not? Probably half a million people there, but, you know. Since we've got the checkbook out anyway...

Also, think of all of the friends and family of these paid conspirators, who suddenly see all this mysterious wealth...

...Wouldn't some rumors get started?

You've got some hypothetical professor who was about to write a paper proving the towers were demolished, suddenly coming into Powerball-sized wealth and abandoning the paper at the same time... his wife never let it slip? His kids didn't object? All his jealous colleagues who noticed the sudden new cars and new home and elaborate vacations, nobody asked questions? Nobody made an anonymous call to the IRS, just out of spite? All the bank employees who noticed thousands of mysterious deposits, all of which have to be reported to the IRS, that didn't leave a trail?

I mean, we're up to a sizeable portion of the US population here. Odds are you've passed some of these people on the street.

Today.

And keep in mind, this can't be chump change. Even in a world where every structural engineering desk jockey is okay with mass murder, they're still not going to risk jail and career ruin and walk away from a huge book deal for ten grand. Oh, no, it's got to be millions, per person, just to make it worth it. Even a dedicated conspirator would need to know he or she was set for life.

Let's say they wrote 500,000 checks (hell, you've got more than 120,000 people in the American Society of Civil Engineers alone, and they'd be the first ones to speak out). Say the average payout was ten million (barely enough to live rich the rest of your life, but let's just say). So that's 500,000 times ten million which is...

...Five TRILLION dollars.

That's about half of the value of all goods and services produced in the United States last year. Therefore the 9/11 conspiracy was, in terms of payroll, the single largest employer in the history of the world.


The board of directors of the 9/11 conspiracy
gather to await instructions (artists' rendering)

And here's the kicker...

100% of the people who were offered the deal, took it.

After all, we don't have a single person who has come running into the offices of the New York Times, waving a check and saying, "look! Here's a check for ten million smackers that the government gave me to be silent about 9/11! Can you believe these assholes? Now give me my book deal!"

Not one. Even with the lure of fame and fortune and a chance to go down in history as The Guy Who Saved American Democracy, even with the crushing guilt of seeing thousands of bodies hauled out of the rubble, even seeing the horrors of a nation turned inside out by war and paranoia that was completely manufactured as a gruesome hoax, some of these people having their own friends and families and colleagues die in the attacks, not one turned down the money... or took the money and came forward anyway.

And that, is the conspiracy mindset.

It's not a belief in corrupt leaders. Hell, we all believe in corrupt leaders. It's a belief in a corrupt everybody. It's driving around in a world where every single person you see out of your windshield is utterly bloodthirsty and amoral, all except for you and a few, brave friends. What could make you feel more important than that?

You can see the attraction right away. Most people, to feel special, have to actually do something special. But why not do what these guys do, and just make the rest of the world out to be wretched? Hell, once we've painted everyone else as mindless or murderous, all we have to do to feel superior to them is roll out of bed.

Remember what I said earlier about Dylan Avery and how it was probably just a desire for fame that drove him to do all this? Look at the parallel here. At the heart of all this is that basic human need to feel special somehow, twisted in the most warped and corrosive way imaginable.

In conclusion, the 9/11 Conspiracy Guys aren't evil and they aren't liars. They're merely filling a basic human need, using their imaginations and paranoia to elevate themselves to a level the real world will never elevate them to. Also, they're retarded.


The Verdict:

Liars? Retarded? They're probably both right. Just as the crooked televangelist steals from old widows who themselves have an honest faith in God, Dylan Avery and the Loose Change guys have made a nice name for themselves (and a nice profit) from a large group of true believers who have always lived at the fringes of society. These are the type who think the moon landing was a hoax, that Area 51 houses alien spacecraft.

And then you have the rank and file, the kids who watched the video and just plain didn't know any better because they didn't follow it up with any reading. They're not reading this, for instance.

No, they saw Loose Change and went charging into their favorite forum or chat room, screaming, "WATCH THIS BITCHWHORES LOOSE CHANGE IS GONNA CHANGE YOUR WORLD." By the time people started posting info that debunked it, it was kind of hard for them to back down without looking like an asshole. So, they stand by it.

So even if you strapped them down and forced them to read this, they'd just pick out one detail that they thought would give them reason to discredit the whole thing and dismiss it from their minds.


link

While I don't really think that the US orchestrated the attack itself, I think that it certainly was asleep at the wheel when it went down. It even had people conveniently elsewhere, further complicating the chain of command. Nevermind someone ok'ing the flights of Saudi nationals out of the country when everything else was grounded.

I read a book called "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" which goes into some detail regarding the US manipulation of it's own currency, the World Bank and the IMF, and also using those two International entities to sell huge civil infrastructure projects to poor countries. The sell? There were US companies that were independant from the government that painted an inflated and overly optimistic financial picture for developing countries and how they could benewfit from massive projects. The deal was that these consultants could put in a good word at the IMF and World bank to help with their loan application. The catch: these countries had to hire US firms (KBR, Halliburton, Chas. T Main to name a few) to do the work. Oh, and these countries would also never be able to repay the debts. They would end up defaulting on them, the US would step up and secure them in exchange for natural resource rights and political capitol.

Now you have a shattered economies thanks to US loan sharks.

Also...

Militant Islam, Nazis & the CIA????

It's a long article, but very much worth the read. If only half of it is true, then the US ties to 9/11 go back 60 years.

Of course there's information being covered up. There is always going to be information covered up, in any situation. Whether it's because they're morons, they aren't sure what to make of the information yet, or they plotted some evil scheme is another story. Just as well as any situation can be easily manipulated to seem like a conspiracy. A person can always find something amiss if they're looking for it. Personally, I'm not taking any sides on this. There is not enough validated information on either side. Unless one of us secretly works for the FBI or Intel, I highly doubt we have all the facts. Even then, they probably still don't have all the facts.

9/11 Truth: Thermite & The Case for Controlled Demolition



911 Mysteries: Part 1 Demolitions: 1 of 3



911 Mysteries - Demolitions (Part 2 of 3)



911 Mysteries - Demolitions (Part 3 of 3)

Rethinking Thermite

One of the pieces of evidence conspiracy theorists use to say the buildings were brought down is a photo with something they interpret as being left behind by a thermite reaction.


There are a number of things they claim with this photo. One is the timeline. They say the photo has firemen which means this was during the rescue operation which only lasted two weeks. Why would they have fireman after the rescue operations? This suggests to them that the cut on the columns were made very close to September 11. The suggestion here is that it was done during the collapse.

They claim that the angle of the cut can't be created by a welding tool and/or is designed to have the building fall in a certain direction.

The other is a yellow substance they claim is residue from a thermite reaction.

Let's examine these claims one by one to see where the evidence takes us...

Timeline and Firemen

The rescue operation took about two weeks. They figured anyone left alive would have died by then anyway, so they started clean up operations and body recovery. During this time there was always at least 50 policemen and 50 firemen left on the scene to recover their fallen brothers. There were even more than that on ground zero until the city of NY told them to leave in November 2001. The city couldn't justify risking the health of 150 police and fireman for body recovery. In fact there was a protest about it which ended with the mayor allowing 50 members of each department on the scene.

Citing safety concerns, Giuliani had sought to scale back the number of firefighters working at ground zero to 25. At one point there had been as many as 150 firefighters and police officers at the site.

The decision angered firefighters still mourning the loss of 343 colleagues in the attacks. Many bodies have not been recovered, and the firefighters said they wanted to help find the remains of their friends and colleagues.

The number of firefighters working at the site was increased to 50 on Thursday.

http://www.firehouse.com/news/2001/11/10_APcharges.html

Below are photos of firemen well after September 11.


October


December 15th 2001

So the fact that there are firemen in the photo doesn't mean anything. That cut could have been done at any time during the clean up and recovery. Lets not forget the building went down some 6 stories underground. The firemen were recovering bodies mainly from the core and some were in the lobby when it happened. So it's not unreasonable to expect firemen there well after the event. Long enough for an ironworker to cut the column.

Angle and yellow residue

Another point is the angle of the cut. The argument here is that it suggests the column was cut at an angle so the building fell in a certain direction, like a tree. But is it possible the column was cut at an angle so just the column fell in a certain direction during cleanup? This can't be, surely the scholars would have asked an ironworker or someone else on the scene. I bet there isn't one photograph someone can find on the internet of a column which is cut at an angle. Remember, we're talking about "Scholars" here.





Once again, a close up of their column...



Maybe I'm being a little unfair. Maybe I just happened to get this from some obscure site. Maybe I work for the government and have a stash of photos the scholars aren't privy to... No, actually I got this from the same place the scholars got their photo.

Scholars Photo:
http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/th...yID=5&picnum=13

The above photo
http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/th...yID=5&picnum=73

Note the yellow smoke and residue left behind by the ironworker.

Thermite in general makes an ugly hole with molten metal drips/blobs. It doesn't make clean cuts. It's a powder that undergoes a violent chemical reaction as seen in the video below.

http://www.guzer.com/videos/thermite_car.php

Note how much thermite is used. The pot is about a liter, but how much thermite is that?

Stoichiometric thermite requires 2 moles of Al per 1 mole of Fe2O3

2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe


2 moles of Al weigh 54 g
1 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 160 g

density of Al=2.64 g/cc
density of Fe2O3=5.24 g/cc


54 grams of Al is equivalent to 20.5 cc of Al.
160g of Fe2O3 is equivalent to 30.5 cc of Fe2O3

Therefore, 51 cc of fully dense powder of 20.5 cc Al and 30.5 cc Fe2O3 weighs (54+160) g = 214 g.

A volume of 1000 cc would weigh (1000/51)*214 = 4.2 kg

For a powder packing density of 50%, the powder would weigh:

0.5*4.2 kg = 2.1 kg = 4.8 lb

That much just to burn a small hole in a small car engine. I bet it's even an aluminum block but lets say it isn't. How much do you think it would take to burn a massive core column? Then add enough to burn for 6 weeks! You see where we're going. You'd need tons.

Here's a Debunking911 Fun Fact!

How much mass would be required to produce molten iron from thermite equal to the same volume of molten aluminum droplets shown flowing from the south tower window:


A mole of Fe weighs 54 g. For every mole of Fe produced by thermite, one mole of Al and 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 is needed.

2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe


One mole of Al weighs 27 g. 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 80 g.

Therefore, (27 + 80) g = 107 g of Al and Fe2O3 is needed to produce 54 g of Fe.

That means the mass of the reactants to that of Fe produced is a ratio of 107/54 = 2. The mass of thermite reactants (Al, Fe2O3) is twice that of the molten iron produced.

Comparing the weight of molten aluminum droplets compared with iron:

Iron is 7.9 g/cc. Aluminum is 2.64 g/cc. Fe is denser than Al by a factor of 3. For the same volume of droplets, Fe would have three times the mass as Al.

To produce the iron from thermite requires a reactant mass that is a factor of 2 more than the iron produced. Also, Fe is 3 times as dense as Al. So, it would take 2*3 = 6 times as much mass to produce the same volume of molten iron droplets from thermite compared with molten aluminum droplets.


Example:

Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6*3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass.

Suppose 10 tons of molten aluminum fell from the south tower, about 1/8th of that available from the airplane. If it had been molten iron produced from thermite, 60 tons of thermite reactants would have to have been stored in Fuji Bank to produce the same volume spilling out of the south tower. The section of floor would have to hold all of that plus the aircraft.

*Amount of aluminum can be ascertained by counting the droplets and measuring their size compared to the known size of the window. It's not easy to get a good number on this. It's based on the number of slugs seen in video stills, their size relative to the window width which was about 22 inches, and the density of aluminum, assuming this was aluminum.

http://www.coolmagnetman.com/magconda.htm

The weight of a gallon of aluminum is about 22.5 pounds. A hundred of these would already be 2250 lbs. A gallon size is not unlike the size of the slugs that were pouring out the window. Look at them relative to the window size. They look small at first, but when you realize how big the towers were, the slugs were fairly large. It must have been in the thousands of pounds.

Some of the video stills show what look like 50 to 100 slugs in just one frame.



The thermite wouldn't have only needed to make a clean cut like the photo above, it would have also needed to cut sideways. Not an easy feat for thermite. You see, it's a powder which burns chaotically. Maybe with some device but no working device has been proven to me to work to cut a vertical column. You can direct it with a canister but that method wouldn't work to cut a column. The canister only makes a small hole. Nano-thermite has been talked about but its uses fall far short of cutting these massive columns. It's in its research stage. They include possible uses for welding molecular devices and possible use as a heat signature flare decoy. Then there is a patent of a device which has been brought up but as of yet, there is no evidence the idea went any further. Does it even work? Even if did, they are "Ganged" together to make the cut. You would still need these boxes all over the columns. Once again the answer to this from the "scholars" is "rationalized technology". They need this technology to exist so it exists. There is some secret super thermite which can be placed in a canister which can survive 1,100 degree C so the primary charge doesn't go off. "Gee debunking, you're so dumb."

Much of Jones and the "scholars" evidence is made up of photographs or videos accompanied by suggestions on what they mean. Below is a passage from Jones' document.

An intriguing photograph (below right) taken by Rob Miller, photojournalist with the New York Post, provides additional photographic evidence (Swanson, 2003) for the use of thermite or a sulfur-containing derivative such as thermate. We see debris and dust as WTC 1 collapses, with WTC 7 seen in the foreground, across the street from WTC 1. The photograph on the left shows, for comparison, the thermite reaction with a grayish-white aluminum-oxide dust plume extending from white-hot molten iron "blob" from the reaction. (Experiment at BYU by the author in which thermite-plus-sulfur cut through a steel cup in a fraction of a second. Any thermite reaction is a dangerous reaction and should only be performed by a trained professional capable of assessing the hazards and risks.)




To illustrate how deceptive this is lets see If I can find the use of thermite using this same test.





To be fair I don't know if Gallagher uses a real Nano-thermite coated Sledge-O-Matic.

Alex Jones, professional conspiracy theorist radio host, has said Jones found evidence of thermite. This isn't true. What Jones found was something which would have been in the debris pile anyway. Sulfur...

WTC Thermite

Sulfur

In Steven Jones' PDF "Answers to Objections and Questions", to support his claim for Sol-gels/Thermite he states:

"One molecule, described by the EPA's Erik Swartz, was present at levels "that dwarfed all others": 1,3-diphenylpropane. "We've never observed it in any sampling we've ever done,"

However when you look at the link he uses
http://www.newsday.com/news/health/...page-right-area

You find out Mr. Jones edits out the VERY next line which states

"He said it was most likely produced by the plastic of tens of thousands of burning computers."

Apparently, Jones felt this was not important enough for his readers to know.

Sloppy research or purposeful deception by the "scholars"? The evidence for one is growing...

Thanks to Shagster, ScottS and David B. Benson for their research.

The government had too much information about the attacks before hand. Somebody obviously 'let' the attacks take place.

quote:

CIA paid Pakistan for terror suspects Daniel McGrory September 26, 2006 PAKISTANI President Pervez Musharraf has claimed the CIA secretly paid his Government millions of dollars for handing over hundreds of al-Qa'ida suspects to the US. The US Government has rules banning such reward payments to foreign powers involved in the war on terror. General Musharraf does not say how much the CIA gave in return for the 369 al-Qa'ida figures that he ordered be passed to the Americans. The US Department of Justice said: "We didn't know about this. It should not happen. "These bounty payments are for private individuals who help to trace terrorists on the FBI's most-wanted list, not foreign governments." The revelation comes from General Musharraf's memoir In the Line of Fire, and will further embarrass the White House at a time when relations between the US and Pakistan are strained. General Musharraf claimed last week that the Bush administration threatened to bomb Pakistan "back to the Stone Age" if it did not co-operate with the US after the 9/11 terror attacks. The latest revelation will embarrass the White House days before General Musharraf is scheduled to meet President George W. Bush and their Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai to discuss how to combat a resurgent Taliban. The disclosures are also causing consternation in Pakistan. Members of General Musharraf's cabinet and senior diplomats reportedly did not know he was writing a book and are worried that relations with Pakistan's allies and Western intelligence agencies will be damaged by the revelations. The CIA refused to divulge the size of its bounty payments, saying: "Our relationships with international leaders is not something we are prepared to talk about." One senior CIA figure added: "Nor do we expect these leaders to do so." Among the suspects surrendered to the US was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the alleged architect of the 9/11 operation and many terror plots in Britain, including a planned attack on Heathrow airport that never came to fruition. General Musharraf does not explain why his intelligence chiefs questioned al-Qa'ida's alleged operational mastermind for only three days before handing him over to the CIA, when he was allegedly responsible for many attacks inside Pakistan and he alone knew the identities of the key figures in Osama bin Laden's network. General Musharraf says that in the Heathrow plot in 2002, Khalid planned to use flights leaving European airports belonging to the national airlines of the Czech Republic, Croatia, Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic and Malta because of their lax security. The signal for hijackers to seize a plane was when the "fasten seat belt" sign was turned on as the aircraft was coming in to land at Heathrow. Al-Qa'ida had picked European Muslims, including a number of white converts, to fly the planes into terminal buildings and fuel dumps at London's main airport, about 25km from the city centre. Pakistani intelligence chiefs are also concerned that General Musharraf may jeopardise their relationship with British intelligence agencies after claiming that a convicted terrorist was once an informer for British agency MI6. The President outlines the role played by a former London public schoolboy, Omar Sheikh, in the kidnap and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in February 2002. General Musharraf says Sheikh, who orchestrated the abduction, was recruited by MI6 while he was studying at the London School of Economics and sent to the Balkans to take part in jihad operations there. He alleges that Sheikh later double-crossed British intelligence. "At some point, he probably became a rogue or double agent," General Musharraf says. Sheikh has been detained since February 2002 and sentenced to death. He is being held in a Karachi jail but British detectives have been denied access to him. General Musharraf says he decided to disclose details of covert operations and his country's capture of 689 suspects since 9/11 to counter claims that Pakistan has not done enough to combat al-Qa'ida. A number of the men his country handed to the Americans have been held in CIA-run secret detention centres. While Mr Bush has tried to play down reports of rising tensions between Islamabad and Washington, relations will not be helped by General Musharraf's disclosures. In the book, he says he was so angered at US attempts to bully Pakistan into supporting the White House that he had his military commanders study "war games" to see if they could take on the American forces should they try to operate inside his borders without permission. He insists it was not intimidation that led him to back the US, but the fact that it was in Pakistan's interest. General Musharraf scorns what he calls "the ludicrous demands" from Washington after 9/11, including one insisting that he suppress protests inside Pakistan against the US. His revelations are also likely to cause upset in India, because he insults the military prowess of his nuclear neighbour. At home, his political opponents say the book is General Musharraf's attempt to bolster his reputation before elections in October next year, as he has signalled his determination to stay another five years in power. They are also questioning what he intends to do with the reported six-figure sum he was paid by the publishers for his book. The Times

ARTICLE REPRODUCED WITHOUT PERMISSION FOR EDUCATIONAL, NON-COMMERCIAL USE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh (TIMELINE) and profile

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN

Did you understand a single thing about the chemistry you just posted?

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid Did you understand a single thing about the chemistry you just posted?

yes. the fact that the amount of thermite required to a) bring the towers down and b) produce that amount of molten "iron" as seen leaking out of the windows clearly shows that thermite was not used in a controlled demolition.

also that thermite could not have possibly burned through the supporting pillars in the manner conspiracy theorists suggest.

nothing like a bit of cold hard science to show how intellectually corrupt the CTers are

quote:

Monday, October 02, 2006 Omar Sheikh and British intelligence Musharraf claims that Omar Saeed Sheikh was a British intelligence agent. Of course, Musharraf would say something like that, as it takes the heat off his own country for some of the things that Omar Sheikh has allegedly done, all supposedly on behalf of Pakistani military intelligence. On the other hand, Musharraf�s story fits. Omar Sheikh was from a well-to-do family, educated at a public school, and had excellent marks. Athletic, aggressive, and intelligent. A young Muslim male at a time when such an agent might well be useful. A text-book mark for British intelligence recruitment. Like all alleged terrorists, he suddenly turned into a violent Islamist religious extremist, and ended up in an Afghan training camp (where Aukai Collins knew him as Umar). As usual with all these �terrorists�, all his old friends now say they have trouble imagining such a thing happening to him. He was supposedly radicalized in Bosnia, but Bosnia seems to have been both a school for Islamic terrorists, and the foundation for NATO/German/French/British/American shenanigans in manipulating Islamist terrorist groups in the proto-WarOnTerror phony fight as a ruse for the ClashOfCivilizations-leading-to-NewMiddleEast crapola. So either it is a legitimate 180 degree personality change, or he is fitting into the role he has to play to infiltrate Islamist terrorist organizations on behalf of British intelligence. Which do you think it is? Omar Saeed Sheikh first made a name for himself by kidnapping and executing four �tourists�, three British and one American, an interesting choice of target. He has subsequently been traded for a planeload full of hijacked Indians, and been convicted of murdering Daniel Pearl (the latter conviction put into question by Musharraf�s remarks). Most famously, he allegedly wired $100,000 to Atta on behalf of Pakistani intelligence (who the big-conspiracy theorists claim was working on behalf of the CIA), and even received back from Atta the excess money Atta didn�t need. I�ve always had trouble with this story. Why would Pakistani intelligence send Atta a relatively small amount of money using a method, and an agent, that could be so easily traced back to them? Why would they take the risk of receiving Atta�s left-over money? On the other hand, if Omar Sheikh was working for British intelligence, with a mandate to put the blame for 9�11 on Pakistani intelligence, sending Atta some easily traced money, and receiving some money back, all to frame Pakistan, makes perfect sense. All the sources for the story are out of India, which has an obvious motive in implicating Pakistan. Of course, this scenario involves the necessity that British intelligence had foreknowledge of the nature and details of the 9�11 plot, and was working hand-in-hand with the plotters to further the bin Laden/Islamic terrorist/Pakistani back-story of September 11.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN yes. the fact that the amount of thermite required to a) bring the towers down and b) produce that amount of molten "iron" as seen leaking out of the windows clearly shows that thermite was not used in a controlled demolition. also that thermite could not have possibly burned through the supporting pillars in the manner conspiracy theorists suggest. nothing like a bit of cold hard science to show how intellectually corrupt the CTers are

Assuming that's true, do you realize that only makes the airline crash/jet fuel pan cake theory even more ludicrous? Yeah, kerosene would definetly bring down an over engineered structure like the twin towers when it supposedly takes a crap load of carefully placed explosives to do the same job (i.e. make it fall on itself in a neat little pile).

Pancake theory my ass. Look at these pictures, and tell me, if the building is imploding by pancake way, or is it exploding out-wise using explosives. Anyone without prior knowledge of this event will look at these photos and tell you that the building is being blown p by explosives.

WTF ... images are not working on the posts, so see the links:


http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/demolitions.html

[/COLOR]

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Assuming that's true, do you realize that only makes the airline crash/jet fuel pan cake theory even more ludicrous? Yeah, kerosene would definetly bring down an over engineered structure like the twin towers when it supposedly takes a crap load of carefully placed explosives to do the same job (i.e. make it fall on itself in a neat little pile).

not at all.

it would take a "crapload" of explosives IF the explosives in question was thermite. and thermite seems to be the choice of CTers. the way in which thermite works means that it wouldve taken a hell of a lot to systematically bring the towers down and create all that molten metal found at ground zero. edit: and a "neat little pile"? debris went fvcking everywhere, which vids are you watching?


does this look like a neat little pile to you?

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Pancake theory my ass. Look at these pictures, and tell me, if the building is imploding by pancake way, or is it exploding out-wise using explosives. Anyone without prior knowledge of this event will look at these photos and tell you that the building is being blown p by explosives.

yeah, well thank god i dont spend my time listening to what mr joe average thinks occured on that fateful day. and to be honest, what the hell do you know about the pancake theory anyway?

please, if explosives were used id like to know which particular explosive you think was used.

and ill try to explain this. the floors of the WTC fell down in a pancake fashion, whilst the outer steel shell was pushed outwards by the falling inner floors due to how the WTCs were designed.

id like to know why you two seem to ignore almost every structural engineer on the planet that has examined the collapses. this is the most examined building collapse in history. and there is almost unanimous agreement.

quote:

Note the WTC columns laid out as if there were a path to the building. There are no concrete slabs attached to columns. This is yet another example of pancaking. With the floors pancaking straight down, the perimeter walls were free to lean over in tall sections before breaking off and coming down. That's what gave them distance.

link

The building didnt collapse though, until later in the day, and it went down in like 8 seconds. A steel frame building has never went down before of fires or even earthquakes, at worst the foundation remains. Remember the famous 2004 Madrid fires? Everyone thought that the building will collapse, but it didnt .... even though the fire was way more devastating.

While the building is going down, you can see pumes of smoke shooting out of the building ...

All signs of demolition ... and this whole crap talk of Silverstein's assistants trying to "clarify" his lingo is bullshiit ... I mean, come on, what is this:

""They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski "

You know why pancake theory is wrong? because the WTC North/South buildings had a solid huge inner core of like 40 columns- the inside wasnt hollow!!! So we should have had the columns remaining standing there!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium The building didnt collapse though, until later in the day, and it went down in like 8 seconds.

if anything that shows how random and unplanned the collapse of the buildings were. If someone had really wanted to blow up the buildings they would have done it at the same time that the planes hit the buildings, not much later in the day.

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail if anything that shows how random and unplanned the collapse of the buildings were. If someone had really wanted to blow up the buildings they would have done it at the same time that the planes hit the buildings, not much later in the day.

Is that why the buildings went down faster than the speed of gravity? I mean, if you dropped a penny from the rooftops of those buildings, it would hit the ground with the same time.

What about resistance of the collapsing floors? Why did the buildings ALL OF THEM STARTED COLLAPSING FROM THE TOP - THATS THE LIGHTEST PART OF THE BUILDING!!! If anything, the buildings should have started collapsing from the bottom!!!

Ugh, enough, this is such a pointless topic ...

oh what- you think with tonnes of concrete and steel collapsing all over the place this wouldnt effect the inner steel columns? jesus, which engineering school did you go to?

youre making some layman's assumptions about something you know very little about.

oh, and how about attending to my post in the other 9/11 thread? im curious as to how youre going to ignore the firemen's quotes.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium The building didnt collapse though, until later in the day, and it went down in like 8 seconds. A steel frame building has never went down before of fires or even earthquakes, at worst the foundation remains. Remember the famous 2004 Madrid fires? Everyone thought that the building will collapse, but it didnt .... even though the fire was way more devastating.

oh, for fuck sake

when are you CTers gonna get a clue and stop spreading bullshit like this? the WTCs were unlike any building ever built. stop comparing it to other steel building fires. the comparisons are COMPLETELY irrelevant.

quote:

A challenge to conspiracy theorists: 1) Find a steel frame building at least 40 stories high 2) Which takes up a whole city block 3) And is a "Tube in a tube" design 4) Which came off its core columns at the bottom floors (Earthquake, fire, whatever - WTC 7) 5) Which was struck by another building or airliner and had structural damage as a result. 6) And weakened by fire for over 6 hours 7) And had trusses that were bolted on with two 5/8" bolts. And which, after all seven tests are met, the building does not fall down. Anyone dissecting this into 7 separate events is lying to you

ok? so its not a fare comparison, and im sick to fucking death of you people saying that it is. it just goes to prove how intellectually corrupt the entire 9/11 truth movement is. youve been proved wrong on so many levels yet you keep arguing the same old shit.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium While the building is going down, you can see pumes of smoke shooting out of the building ... All signs of demolition ... and this whole crap talk of Silverstein's assistants trying to "clarify" his lingo is bullshiit ... I mean, come on, what is this:

more bullshit. do you have any idea of how explosives work? they EXPLODE, then things fall. they DO NOT GET BIGGER WITH TIME. there is a sudden explosion, there isnt an explosion that gets bigger the longer you wait after the time the explosion occured. what youre seeing arent explosive "squibs".

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium ""They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski "

whats your point?

you sir, need to take a good hard look at the information you just rally behind. youre another 9/11 CTer that doesnt try to appreciate both sides of the argument.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Is that why the buildings went down faster than the speed of gravity? I mean, if you dropped a penny from the rooftops of those buildings, it would hit the ground with the same time. What about resistance of the collapsing floors? Why did the buildings ALL OF THEM STARTED COLLAPSING FROM THE TOP - THATS THE LIGHTEST PART OF THE BUILDING!!! If anything, the buildings should have started collapsing from the bottom!!! Ugh, enough, this is such a pointless topic ...

oh geez! more fucking bullshit. do you critically analyse ANYTHING you swallow from your shitty websites?

[QUOTE]
In every photo and every video, you can see columns far outpacing the collapse of the building. Not only are the columns falling faster than the building but they are also falling faster than the debris cloud which is ALSO falling faster than the building. This proves the buildings fell well below free fall speed. That is, unless the beams had a rocket pointed to the ground.

Just look at any video you like and watch the perimeter columns.

Deceptive videos stop the timer of the fall at 10:09 when only the perimeter column hits the ground and not the building itself. If you notice, the building just finishes disappearing behind the debris cloud which is still about 40 stories high.

Below is a more accurate graphic using a paper written by Dr. Frank Greening which can be found at: http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

The paper takes the transfer of momentum into account. Like a billiard ball being hit by another on a pool table, each floor transferred its momentum to the next as represented below. The more weight, the less resistance each floor gave.



The time required to strip off a floor, according to Frank Greening, is a maximum of about 110 milliseconds = 0.110 seconds. It is rather the conservation of momentum that slowed the collapse together with a small additional time for the destruction of each floor.

Below are calculations from a physics blogger...

When I did the calculations, what I got for a thousand feet was about nine seconds- let's see,
d = 1/2at^2
so
t = (2d/a)^1/2
a is 9.8m/s^2 (acceleration of gravity at Earth's surface, according to Wikipedia), [He gives this reference so you can double check him.]
d is 417m (height of the World Trade Center towers, same source)
so
t = (834m/9.8m/s^2)^1/2 = 9.23s
OK, so how fast was it going? Easy enough,
v = at
v = (9.8m/s^2 x 9.23s) = 90.4m/s
So in the following second, it would have fallen about another hundred meters. That's almost a quarter of the height it already fell. And we haven't even made it to eleven seconds yet; it could have fallen more than twice its height in that additional four seconds. If the top fell freely, in 13.23 seconds it would have fallen about two and one-half times as far as it actually did fall in that time. So the collapse was at much less than free-fall rates.


Let's see:
KE = 1/2mv^2
The mass of the towers was about 450 million kg, according to this. Four sources, he has. I think that's pretty definitive. So now we can take the KE of the top floor, and divide by two- that will be the average of the top and bottom floors. Then we'll compare that to the KE of a floor in the middle, and if they're comparable, then we're good to go- take the KE of the top floor and divide by two and multiply by 110 stories. We'll also assume that the mass is evenly divided among the floors, and that they were loaded to perhaps half of their load rating of 100lbs/sqft. That would be
208ft x 208ft = 43,264sqft
50lbs/sqft * 43264sqft = 2,163,200lbs = 981,211kg
additional weight per floor. So the top floor would be
450,000,000 kg / 110 floors = 4,090,909 kg/floor
so the total mass would be
4,090,909 kg + 981,211 kg = 5,072,120 kg/floor
Now, the velocity at impact we figured above was
90.4m/s
so our
KE = (5,072,120kg x (90.4m/s)^2)/2 = 20,725,088,521J
So, divide by 2 and we get
10,362,544,260J
OK, now let's try a floor halfway up:
t = (2d/a)^1/2 = (417/9.8)^1/2 = 6.52s
v = at = 9.8*6.52 = 63.93m/s
KE = (mv^2)/2 = (5,072,120kg x (63.93m/s)^2)/2 = 10,363,863,011J
Hey, look at that! They're almost equal! That means we can just multiply that 10 billion Joules of energy by 110 floors and get the total, to a very good approximation. Let's see now, that's
110 floors * 10,362,544,260J (see, I'm being conservative, took the lower value)
= 1,139,879,868,600J
OK, now how much is 1.1 trillion joules in tons of TNT-equivalent? Let's see, now, a ton of TNT is 4,184,000,000J. So how many tons of TNT is 1,139,879,868,600J?
1,139,879,868,600J / 4,184,000,000J/t = 272t

Now, that's 272 tons of TNT, more or less; five hundred forty one-thousand-pound blockbuster bombs, more or less. That's over a quarter kiloton. We're talking about as much energy as a small nuclear weapon- and we've only calculated the kinetic energy of the falling building. We haven't added in the burning fuel, or the burning paper and cloth and wood and plastic, or the kinetic energy of impact of the plane (which, by the way, would have substantially turned to heat, and been put into the tower by the plane debris, that's another small nuclear weapon-equivalent) and we've got enough heat to melt the entire whole thing.

Remember, we haven't added the energy of four floors of burning wood, plastic, cloth and paper, at- let's be conservative, say half the weight is stuff like that and half is metal, so 25lbs/sqft? And then how about as much energy as the total collapse again, from the plane impact? And what about the energy from the burning fuel? You know, I'm betting we have a kiloton to play with here. I bet we have a twentieth of the energy that turned the entire city of Nagasaki into a flat burning plain with a hundred-foot hole surrounded by a mile of firestorm to work with. - Schneibster edited by Debunking 911

Let me make this clear, I don't assume to know what the ACTUAL fall time was. Anyone telling you they know is lying. The above calculation doesn't say that's the fall time. That was not its purpose. It's only a quick calculation which serves its purpose. To show that the buildings could have fallen within the time it did. It's absurd to suggest one can make simple calculations and know the exact fall time. You need a super computer with weeks of calculation to take into account the office debris, plumbing, ceiling tile etc.. etc... Was it 14 or was it 16? It doesn't matter to the point I'm making, which is the fall times are well within the possibility for normal collapse. Also, the collapse wasn't at free fall as conspiracy theorists suggest.

For more analysis of the building fall times, go to 911myths free fall page.

Please refer to Dr Frank Greening's paper for detailed calculations.

http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

One of the more absurd arguments is the idea that there was a "Pyroclastic flow" during the collapse. This is easily debunked. You will note not one person was poached at ground zero. Pyroclastic flows are a minimum of 100C, or 212F.

The gas is usually at a temperature of 100-800 degrees Celsius. The flows normally hug the ground and travel downhill under gravity, their speed depending upon the gradient of the slope and the size of the flow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyroclastic_flow

Not ONE person, even the ones trapped INSIDE the towers, complained of dusty air burning their skin. Trees were left green next to the towers. Paper floated around ground zero without being burned.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Is that why the buildings went down faster than the speed of gravity? I mean, if you dropped a penny from the rooftops of those buildings, it would hit the ground with the same time. What about resistance of the collapsing floors? Why did the buildings ALL OF THEM STARTED COLLAPSING FROM THE TOP - THATS THE LIGHTEST PART OF THE BUILDING!!! If anything, the buildings should have started collapsing from the bottom!!! Ugh, enough, this is such a pointless topic ...

Well, not exactly. While in theory everything falls at the same speed, in an atmosphere there is heavy air resistance... You can drop a penny off of a building and it will reach its terminal velocity in a few seconds. Although that really doesnt have much to do with falling buildings.

As for the buildings collapsing near the top... thats where the planes hit no? There is also a change of materials used. Heavier, stronger materials are used towards the bottom than the top.

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail Well, not exactly. While in theory everything falls at the same speed, in an atmosphere there is heavy air resistance... You can drop a penny off of a building and it will reach its terminal velocity in a few seconds. Although that really doesnt have much to do with falling buildings. As for the buildings collapsing near the top... thats where the planes hit no? There is also a change of materials used. Heavier, stronger materials are used towards the bottom than the top.

Incorrect. One of the WTC buildings was hit in the lower half, and it didnt even hit the center, it hit the left side of the building!

So you think the lighter part of the building collapses first? Where do you think the most pressure is exerted on - the top or the bottom?? The bottom, of course!

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Incorrect. One of the WTC buildings was hit in the lower half, and it didnt even hit the center, it hit the left side of the building! So you think the lighter part of the building collapses first? Where do you think the most pressure is exerted on - the top or the bottom?? The bottom, of course!

lol... just read pkc's post. Im out of this thread

I got a better idea. Just let this thread die and leave it with all of OGVH's and TX's CT threads.

@ PKC: What were the main sources for your argument here (the entire thread)? I'm just asking so I can see it all for myself and evaluate it.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.