Actor Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Story

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Let's get one thing straight.... molten steel was found months after 9/11...including inside the basement levels. You're saying an oxygen starved environment below ground, buried beneath all of that debris, kept regular jetfuel flames alive... for months?

regular jetfuel flames? you dont know how fire works either?

All of the rubble burned, liquid FLOWS DOWNWARD WITH THE FORCE OF GRAVITY.

Do you know how dumb all this sounds? Really?

You can't seem to grasp the simple fact that regular "rubble" or jetfuel fires are incapable of melting steel.

Yet, you want to keep thinking otherwise...do you have reports or factual evidence to back up your claim? If so, you would be solving what the government hasn't been able to figure out. Do post your evidence.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

It's not an excuse when it's 100% factual.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Let's get one thing straight.... molten steel was found months after 9/11...including inside the basement levels. You're saying an oxygen starved environment below ground, buried beneath all of that debris, kept regular jetfuel flames alive... for months?

regular jetfuel flames? you dont know how fire works either?

All of the rubble burned, liquid FLOWS DOWNWARD WITH THE FORCE OF GRAVITY.

Do you know how dumb all this sounds? Really?

You can't seem to grasp the simple fact that regular "rubble" or jetfuel fires are incapable of melting steel.

Yet, you want to keep thinking otherwise...do you have reports or factual evidence to back up your claim? If so, you would be solving what the government hasn't been able to figure out. Do post your evidence.

Ok... so explain the fires, in loose change ironically, in which entire concrete and steel floors were eradicated by a normal fire, without 5000 gallons of accelerant?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

It's not an excuse when it's 100% factual.

It is an excuse

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

It's not an excuse when it's 100% factual.

It is an excuse

Uh huh... Fact remains they'll be basing their analysis of WTC7's symmetrical "collapse" on steel that was never collected or examined. That's why it has taken them so long to come up with any plausible explanation

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

It's not an excuse when it's 100% factual.

It is an excuse

Uh huh... Fact remains they'll be basing their analysis of WTC7's symmetrical "collapse" on steel that was never collected or examined. That's why it has taken them so long to come up with any plausible explanation

Whatever makes you sleep at night.

btw do yo uave proof the steel was shipped to a foreign country as scrap?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

It's not an excuse when it's 100% factual.

It is an excuse

Uh huh... Fact remains they'll be basing their analysis of WTC7's symmetrical "collapse" on steel that was never collected or examined. That's why it has taken them so long to come up with any plausible explanation

Whatever makes you sleep at night.

btw do yo uave proof the steel was shipped to a foreign country as scrap?

Shanghai Baosteel Group Corp of China Will Recycle World Trade Center Debris Dated January 24, 2002

For very competitive price of 120$ a ton (normal price 150$) :roll:

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

It's not an excuse when it's 100% factual.

It is an excuse

Uh huh... Fact remains they'll be basing their analysis of WTC7's symmetrical "collapse" on steel that was never collected or examined. That's why it has taken them so long to come up with any plausible explanation

Whatever makes you sleep at night.

btw do yo uave proof the steel was shipped to a foreign country as scrap?

You're trying to argue about WTC7, yet you're unaware that the debris was illegally removed from the crime scene? There are many sources about it, including fire engineering articles calling out the government about its illegal removal. Look it up.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

It's not an excuse when it's 100% factual.

It is an excuse

Uh huh... Fact remains they'll be basing their analysis of WTC7's symmetrical "collapse" on steel that was never collected or examined. That's why it has taken them so long to come up with any plausible explanation

Whatever makes you sleep at night.

btw do yo uave proof the steel was shipped to a foreign country as scrap?

to Shanghai Baosteel Group Corp in china actually, here is their press release.

This clearly has a date after 9-11, I guess I should have made myself clear. What I am looking for is proof that they shipped this stuff off without even getting to look at it.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot


Shanghai Baosteel Group Corp of China Will Recycle World Trade Center Debris Dated January 24, 2002

That's great..

New York authorities' decision to ship the twin towers' scrap to recyclers has raised the anger of victims' families and some engineers who believe the massive girders should be further examined to help determine how the towers collapsed.

But New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg insisted there are better ways to study the tragedy of September 11.

"If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do," said Bloomberg, a former engineering major. "Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything."


Sad.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Genx87

So when the report comes out this Spring like it is planned and makes your conspiracy's pillar crumble(pun intended) what will you latch onto next?

You missed my edit above:

"Edit: It should also be noted NIST was not even able to examine one piece of steel from WTC7, as the evidence was quickly shipped overseas and destroyed."

So, they'll be basing their entire explanation (4 1/2 years later) without ever examining the steel...nice?

I see you already have your excuse planned, a good conspiracy theorist always has those handy.

It's not an excuse when it's 100% factual.

It is an excuse

Uh huh... Fact remains they'll be basing their analysis of WTC7's symmetrical "collapse" on steel that was never collected or examined. That's why it has taken them so long to come up with any plausible explanation

Whatever makes you sleep at night.

btw do yo uave proof the steel was shipped to a foreign country as scrap?

You're trying to argue about WTC7, yet you're unaware that the debris was illegally removed from the crime scene? There are many sources about it, including fire engineering articles calling out the government about its illegal removal. Look it up.

What law says they cant sell it for scrap once it's use in the investigation is done?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87


This clearly has a date after 9-11, I guess I should have made myself clear. What I am looking for is proof that they shipped this stuff off without even getting to look at it.

Steel was the structural material of the buildings. As such it was the most important evidence to preserve in order to puzzle out how the structures held up to the impacts and fires, but then disintegrated into rubble. Since no steel frame buildings had ever collapsed due to fires, the steel should have been subjected to detailed analysis. So what did the authorities do with this key evidence of the vast crime and unprecedented engineering failure? They recycled it!
Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage. 1

Mayor Bloomberg, a former engineering major, was not concerned about the destruction of the evidence:
If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do. Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything. 2

During the official investigation controlled by FEMA, One hundred fifty pieces of steel were saved for future study. One hundred fifty pieces out of hundreds of thousands of pieces! Moreover it is not clear who made the decision to save these particular pieces. It is clear that the volunteer investigators were doing their work at the Fishkills dump, not at Ground Zero, so whatever steel they had access to was first picked over by the people running the cleanup operation.
Highly Sensitive Garbage

Given that the people in charge considered the steel garbage, useless to any investigation in this age of computer simulations, they certainly took pains to make sure it didn't end up anywhere other than a smelting furnace. They installed GPS locater devices on each of the trucks that was carrying loads away from Ground Zero, at a cost of $1000 each. The securitysolutions.com website has an article on the tracking system with this passage.
Ninety-nine percent of the drivers were extremely driven to do their jobs. But there were big concerns, because the loads consisted of highly sensitive material. One driver, for example, took an extended lunch break of an hour and a half. There was nothing criminal about that, but he was dismissed. 3
Shielding Investigators From the Evidence

According to FEMA, more than 350,000 tons of steel were extracted from Ground Zero and barged or trucked to salvage yards where it was cut up for recycling. Four salvage yards were contracted to process the steel.

* Hugo Nue Schnitzer at Fresh Kills (FK) Landfill, Staten Island, NJ
* Hugo Nue Schnitzer's Claremont (CM) Terminal in Jersey City, NJ
* Metal Management in Newark (NW), NJ
* Blanford and Co. in Keasbey (KB), NJ

FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the Study, "Collection and storage of steel members from the WTC site was not part of the BPS Team efforts sponsored by FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)."


I dunno, this seems to be what is on the net, I dont know anyone who works at those places to ask firsthand. *shrug*

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Let's get one thing straight.... molten steel was found months after 9/11...including inside the basement levels. You're saying an oxygen starved environment below ground, buried beneath all of that debris, kept regular jetfuel flames alive... for months?

regular jetfuel flames? you dont know how fire works either?

All of the rubble burned, liquid FLOWS DOWNWARD WITH THE FORCE OF GRAVITY.

Do you know how dumb all this sounds? Really?

You can't seem to grasp the simple fact that regular "rubble" or jetfuel fires are incapable of melting steel.

Yet, you want to keep thinking otherwise...do you have reports or factual evidence to back up your claim? If so, you would be solving what the government hasn't been able to figure out. Do post your evidence.

Ok... so explain the fires, in loose change ironically, in which entire concrete and steel floors were eradicated by a normal fire, without 5000 gallons of accelerant?

hey notorious, youre off on a tangent, lets hear your response to this.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Let's get one thing straight.... molten steel was found months after 9/11...including inside the basement levels. You're saying an oxygen starved environment below ground, buried beneath all of that debris, kept regular jetfuel flames alive... for months?

regular jetfuel flames? you dont know how fire works either?

All of the rubble burned, liquid FLOWS DOWNWARD WITH THE FORCE OF GRAVITY.

Do you know how dumb all this sounds? Really?

You can't seem to grasp the simple fact that regular "rubble" or jetfuel fires are incapable of melting steel.

Yet, you want to keep thinking otherwise...do you have reports or factual evidence to back up your claim? If so, you would be solving what the government hasn't been able to figure out. Do post your evidence.

Ok... so explain the fires, in loose change ironically, in which entire concrete and steel floors were eradicated by a normal fire, without 5000 gallons of accelerant?

hey notorious, youre off on a tangent, lets hear your response to this.

I'm not sure what part of LC2E you're referring to...although you seem to be infatuated with it). Point out a time frame.

Where's your evidence regarding "rubble" fires melting steel?

 

[Steeplerot]

IMO when you see the plane crash you see a huge explosion of jet fuel fly out of the building,

then you have a firefighter on tape (in their recently released communications while the fire was burning) say they could get it under control this guy was on the 81st floor or something, a place where it is said the heart of the 5k degree steel melting inferno was.

doesent sound like a huge inferno of 5000 degrees or whatever if a firefighter is in there making assesments that the fire could be under control in 2 hours (the big thing is while he is doing this he is making observations of "secondary" explosions).

Sounds fishy to me. Sounds fishy to fireman too from what I have heard.

The other thing I wonder about is the maintaince guy in sub floor 1 one saying people were hurt from explosions, and all the damage to the lobby, the elevators are hermediclly sealed so there is supposedly no way a fireball went all the way down to the first floor since it is airtight for obvious reasons of gas attacks etc.

I am no explosives expert but it seems like what the maintaince guy said was that something in the base of the tower went off and the blast went up to the lobby causing the damage seen before the collapse.
(which a lot of early news reports said there was a explosion heard under also)

Regardless, this is like trying to figure out what happened to JFK, the official story is pretty shoddy, but its old news.

Sure, something to gossip about, but the hard evidence is long since destroyed.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
IMO when you see the plane crash you see a huge explosion of jet fuel fly out of the building,

then you have a firefighter on tape (in their recently released communications while the fire was burning) say they could get it under control this guy was on the 81st floor or something, a place where it is said the heart of the 5k degree steel melting inferno was.

doesent sound like a huge inferno of 5000 degrees or whatever if a firefighter is in there making assesments that the fire could be under control in 2 hours (the big thing is while he is doing this he is making observations of "secondary" explosions).

Sounds fishy to me. Sounds fishy to fireman too from what I have heard.

The other thing I wonder about is the maintaince guy in sub floor 1 one saying people were hurt from explosions, and all the damage to the lobby, the elevators are hermediclly sealed so there is supposedly no way a fireball went all the way down to the first floor since it is airtight for obvious reasons of gas attacks etc.

I am no explosives expert but it seems like what the maintaince guy said was that something in the base of the tower went off and the blast went up to the lobby causing the damage seen before the collapse.
(which a lot of early news reports said there was a explosion heard under also)

Regardless, this is like trying to figure out what happened to JFK, its old news.

Something to gossip about, but the hard evidence is long since destroyed.

There's nothing fishy about it. At 134,000 BTU's per gallon, kerosene (jet fuel) is one of the most energy dense fuels on earth, with more than 50% more energy density than propane or gasoline, and more than twice that of natural gas. A fully loaded 757 carries 11,466 gallons of kerosene, or 1,536,444,000 BTU's of energy (edit: or 1,628,630,640,000 joules if you prefer -- yes, that's more than 1.6 TJ).

Think on that the next time you board an airplane.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Vic


Think on that the next time you board an airplane.

I don't buy it, you see the fuel blast outward in a huge fireball, a good part of that fuel was outside and fell to the ground, (most burned up I assume) not inside, nor does it seem like it would melt steel what little stayed in. A explosion of fuel would have raced outside where the easiest path is, which would of been the entry hole, as seen in the videos not inside to superheat steel.

Sure there was fuel inside, but cmon, jet fuel burns very very fast, thats why they use it in jets, then there is the fireman that made it inside to where it happened and said they could get it under control, that to me doesent sound like all this jet fuel everywhere.

 

[Stonejaw]

I just want to ask why people believe that a fire caused the steel to melt causing the "pancake" effect of the floors. Because you have to assume when the plane hit, the fuel tanks were spilled and caught on fire. Now when you burn fuel like this in the open it is not burning at maximum effiecency or temperature because the correct oxygen fuel ratio is not there. Now inside a jet engine the fuel is burning at maximum effieciency and is in constant contact with the steel and aluminum that makes up a jet engine and this engine does not melt it does not soften. The metal in the building was WAY thicker then any metal in a jet engine so how could the building steel melt or soften???

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Vic
Think on that the next time you board an airplane.

I don't buy it, you see the fuel blast outward in a huge fireball, a good part of that fuel was outside and fell to the ground, (most burned up I assume) not inside, nor does it seem like it would melt steel what little stayed in.

I think you fail to realize just how much energy I'm talking about. Converted to electricity, it would be 454,062,222 watt-hours. More energy than the entire Bay Area uses in a day.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Let's get one thing straight.... molten steel was found months after 9/11...including inside the basement levels. You're saying an oxygen starved environment below ground, buried beneath all of that debris, kept regular jetfuel flames alive... for months?

regular jetfuel flames? you dont know how fire works either?

All of the rubble burned, liquid FLOWS DOWNWARD WITH THE FORCE OF GRAVITY.

Do you know how dumb all this sounds? Really?

You can't seem to grasp the simple fact that regular "rubble" or jetfuel fires are incapable of melting steel.

Yet, you want to keep thinking otherwise...do you have reports or factual evidence to back up your claim? If so, you would be solving what the government hasn't been able to figure out. Do post your evidence.

Ok... so explain the fires, in loose change ironically, in which entire concrete and steel floors were eradicated by a normal fire, without 5000 gallons of accelerant?

hey notorious, youre off on a tangent, lets hear your response to this.

I'm not sure what part of LC2E you're referring to...although you seem to be infatuated with it). Point out a time frame.

Where's your evidence regarding "rubble" fires melting steel?

Im not watching that POS again.

Its the part where they outline the other skyscraper fires that didnt collapse.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Vic
Think on that the next time you board an airplane.

I don't buy it, you see the fuel blast outward in a huge fireball, a good part of that fuel was outside and fell to the ground, (most burned up I assume) not inside, nor does it seem like it would melt steel what little stayed in.

I think you fail to realize just how much energy I'm talking about. Converted to electricity, it would be 454,062,222 watt-hours. More energy than the entire Bay Area uses in a day.

Yes, I saw the rather large explosion it made OUTSIDE, inside it look like some spray while office furniture and crap burnt after being intitally lit by fast burning jet fuel.

But the fuel blew OUT in a fireball. (you can see the fuel bellow out clearly in any video of impact) So we are not even dealing with anything near full tanks inside. Fuel spills explode, then its over, the fuel is gone, then just office junk burning at a much lower temperature.

This is just morbid, I am done with the thread I dont even like thinking about the whole thing to be honest in this much detail.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Im not watching that POS again.

Its the part where they outline the other skyscraper fires that didnt collapse.

Where's your evidence of "rubble" fires melting steel?

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Stonejaw
I just want to ask why people believe that a fire caused the steel to melt causing the "pancake" effect of the floors. Because you have to assume when the plane hit, the fuel tanks were spilled and caught on fire. Now when you burn fuel like this in the open it is not burning at maximum effiecency or temperature because the correct oxygen fuel ratio is not there. Now inside a jet engine the fuel is burning at maximum effieciency and is in constant contact with the steel and aluminum that makes up a jet engine and this engine does not melt it does not soften. The metal in the building was WAY thicker then any metal in a jet engine so how could the building steel melt or soften???

It didnt melt the steel, it heated the steel enough to weaken, causing the collapse.

Turbine engines have JUST A LITTLE BIT of air moving through them to cool themselves...