Audio of the explosives which brought down WTC 7

[kylebisme]

This isn't "evidence".

It most certainly is evidence of nano-thrermite explosives having been used in bringing down the WTC buildings, you're just in denial. The same goes for the rest of your handwaving arguments, so I won't bother addressing them point by point.

Report: Netanyahu says 9/11 terror attacks good for Israel...

Sure, but that just proves he's a cold-hearted prick, not that he had any involvement in the attacks, or even foreknowledge for that matter.

 

[xj0hnx]

It most certainly is evidence of nano-thrermite explosives having been used in bringing down the WTC buildings, you're just in denial. The same goes for the rest of your handwaving arguments, so I won't bother addressing them point by point.

The only people that would consider ...

One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.

Random dirt brought to them as "evidence" are those desperately seeking anything they can reconcile as proof of their delusion.

 

[event8horizon]

Sure, but that just proves he's a cold-hearted prick, not that he had any involvement in the attacks, or even foreknowledge for that matter.

he asked who benefited and netanyahu sure thinks israel did. AQ sure as hell didnt benefit....but the likud party does have some interesting connections:
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3003likud_usgangsta.html

Stephen L. Friedman and Menachem Atzmon: partners in Likud money-laundering, with implications in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

A Philadelphia lawyer, Friedman was the general counsel in the United States for the Likud party of Israel from 1984 (or, officially, 1988) to 1999. Friedman is a close friend of the Netanyahu family.......
......
Atzmon and his business partner Ezra Harel are the majority owners (57&#37😉 of ICTS—International Consultants on Targeted Security, run by "former [Israeli] military commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and security agencies" according its Web site. In 1999, Atzmon's Netherlands-based firm took over management of security at Logan Airport in Boston, Massachusetts, through ICTS' subsidiary Huntleigh USA.

This convicted Likud criminal's firm was in charge of security at Logan Airport—inspecting the validity of passports and visas, searching cargo, screening passengers—when two airliners were hijacked from there on Sept. 11, 2001, and demolished the World Trade Center towers in New York.



if i remember right, i think the shoe bomber got through israeli security too. i think there was another incident too...ill look into it.

 

[LunarRay]

The only people that would consider ...



Random dirt brought to them as "evidence" are those desperately seeking anything they can reconcile as proof of their delusion.

I seem to remember that that evidence was also found by official and semi official bodies. At least the bit with the spheres present.
There are lots of folks who took some of that dust as memories of the event. Even both my sisters and cousins scoped up some and have it still... or did last I knew.

 

[event8horizon]

I seem to remember that that evidence was also found by official and semi official bodies. At least the bit with the spheres present.
There are lots of folks who took some of that dust as memories of the event. Even both my sisters and cousins scoped up some and have it still... or did last I knew.

are you serious!! please find out. im sure youve read the nanothermite paper. just get ya a magnet and try and find some of those red/gray chips!! send some to me!!

 

[LunarRay]

are you serious!! please find out. im sure youve read the nanothermite paper. just get ya a magnet and try and find some of those red/gray chips!! send some to me!!

My sister said she did that and didn't see any chips of any sort... I asked what amplification she used and said a micro scope that her son used for his chemistry studies. So I've faith she would have had there been stuff there. She said she got the dust down by South Ferry.. (the Ferry what goes to Staten Island) perhaps that was too far away to carry 'chips'. It's not real far but maybe 2 stops on the IRT (subway) My other sister and I don't communicate very often.
She actually took her change purse and put the dust in there.
I'd loved to have been able to present her and her dust... She's a credible witness too.. a person who'd not easily be dismissed.

 

[kylebisme]

Random dirt brought to them as "evidence" are those desperately seeking anything they can reconcile as proof of their delusion.

The video evidence and the laws of physics alone prove the buildings were brought down with explosives, and you have to ignore that as you desperately cling to your delusions to the contrary. Seriously man, think about it. What evidence do you have that a top-down collapse (purported explanation of WTC 1 & 2) or fire-induced free fall (purported explanation of WTC 7) of any building-like structure is even possible? I'll tell you; you've got squat, and that's all you'll ever have, as neither is even close to possible.

The nano-thermite found in the dust is trivial compared to video evidence and the laws of physics. It's simply evidence of that having been a type of explosives which was used. It's not random by any stretch either, but rather highly engineered stuff which few companies in the world have the means of making.

he asked who benefited and netanyahu sure thinks israel did.

Rather, he was asked what how the attacks would affect US/Israel relations, and while those certainly did benefit, powerful US corporations benefited too, some notable examples here. Besides, the while there's evidence to suggest the possibility that people within the Israeli establishment might have been involved, it's absurd to suggest they could have pulled it off without the approval of people in the US establishment, let alone cover it up.

AQ sure as hell didnt benefit....

Yeah, that's certainly true. When taking cui bono into account, as any proper criminal invesgation should, AQ doesn't even make the list.

I seem to remember that that evidence was also found by official and semi official bodies. At least the bit with the spheres present.

Yeah, the USGS reported the iron-rich microspheres, as did R.J. Lee when they did their damage assessment for Deutshe Bank.

My sister said she did that and didn't see any chips of any sort... I asked what amplification she used and said a micro scope that her son used for his chemistry studies.

Ask her to put the dust in a plastic bag and run a magnet up it to drag out the nano-thrermite. It's tiny fragments mixed in with a lot of other stuff, and even the scientists who found it didn't do so until after doing that, as they started out just looking for residues from explosive reactions without suspecting they would find actual unreacted material.

 

[xj0hnx]

The video evidence and the laws of physics alone prove the buildings were brought down with explosives, and you have to ignore that as you desperately cling to your delusions to the contrary. Seriously man, think about it. What evidence do you have that a top-down collapse (purported explanation of WTC 1 & 2) or fire-induced free fall (purported explanation of WTC 7) of any building-like structure is even possible? I'll tell you; you've got squat, and that's all you'll ever have, as neither is even close to possible.

We are talking about explosives, stop running away to another topic when confronted with questions that are inconvenient to answer.

 

[LunarRay]

We are talking about explosives, stop running away to another topic when confronted with questions that are inconvenient to answer.

Well... Let's see if I can sort of explain why something had to assist in the collapse of the Towers 1,2.
Looking at the video we can see, measure and conclude that the building collapses at ~ 60 ish % of Free Fall Acceleration... that, as you know, means that it is accelerating down... The data points indicate it is a constant acceleration. We also can see that the upper bit of the towers (more obvious in tower 1) is being demolished before and during the first few seconds and it seems to lose 70% of its size (and mass, I'd presume) before it piles into the lower bit. Of major import from my view is that I see ejection of stuff with mass up at high velocity. That ought to be impossible if it was like Bazant suggests. The tamper (Upper Block) is in pieces and those pieces are falling along side the building at the same rate as the building is falling which ought to indicate the only Resistance to both the falling to the side stuff and the building is air Resistance or the resistance within the structure provided resistance equal to air.
The buildings were created in three sections with each section above comprised of lesser structure than the one below. The 78th floor was massive in regard to its redundancy and the point of transition. Not one bit of 'jolt' is seen as the building collapses to that and beyond that point.... I'm not exactly sure just how massive the structure is at that point - I've forgotten. But I can say when I first learned what it was I could not see how anything would blast through that. The feature of heat conduction seems omitted from anyone's thinking but the Law of thermodynamics exists no matter how you think. There is NO flammable material to speak of within the 47 column core section... not much to burn and heat up the core columns. They didn't loose their strength due to heat issues for more than a few minutes as the fuel burned and that was not long. So, therefore, regardless of any other issue those columns should have remained standing. Breaking into 30 ish foot sections is not logical.
There is other stuff like squibs and energy sinks that eliminate the energy to do as Bazant suggests as well... One thing is certain... When you eliminate the impossible what is left no matter how improbable contains the truth. That truth seems to be expolsives of some sort... Then finding what seems like explosive residue and unreacted (I'm not sure about that bit) sort of clinches what is probable in my view.

Edit: The office stuff was certified that it met the fire safety code for high rise buildings. That sorta means if a fire occurred the office stuff would be of minimum fire potential. The building did not contain gas cooking fuel... it was electrical.
The terrorist passport is a simply amazing event. To have gone from the terrorist's pocket and through the fire ball and land atop the dust... remember the plane hit first and it should have been under the dust of the collapse... makes me wonder just who thinks these things up...

 

[LunarRay]

Yeah, the USGS reported the iron-rich microspheres, as did R.J. Lee when they did their damage assessment for Deutshe Bank.


Ask her to put the dust in a plastic bag and run a magnet up it to drag out the nano-thrermite. It's tiny fragments mixed in with a lot of other stuff, and even the scientists who found it didn't do so until after doing that, as they started out just looking for residues from explosive reactions without suspecting they would find actual unreacted material.

She's pretty up to speed on this subject. She'd know what to do. Although she spends her time looking for people she is pretty well educated in the Science of this topic.

 

[xj0hnx]

Well... Let's see if I can sort of explain why something had to assist in the collapse of the Towers 1,2.
Looking at the video we can see, measure and conclude that the building collapses at ~ 60 ish % of Free Fall Acceleration... that, as you know, means that it is accelerating down...

I understand why, my point is that if you can not explain, or at least attempt to explain the points I have raised, lack of evidence of controlled conventional demolition, and how "they" managed a controlled ignition in a building that was on fire by a substance that ignites with contact of even a spark (thermite), than you can scratch explosives off the list.

 

[kylebisme]

We are talking about explosives, stop running away to another topic when confronted with questions that are inconvenient to answer.

Rather, I was talking about explosives, to which you responded by trying to run away from it by dismissing highly energetic and exquisitely engineered explosives as dirt.

...my point is that if you can not explain, or at least attempt to explain the points I have raised, lack of evidence of controlled conventional demolition, and how "they" managed a controlled ignition in a building that was on fire by a substance that ignites with contact of even a spark (thermite), than you can scratch explosives off the list.

Rather, you can't explain away the mounds of evidence of either the conventional controlled demolition of WTC 7 or the unconventional ones of WTC 1 & 2, and continue to ignore obvious facts like that of shielding being capable of protecting explosives from sparks and heat, even after they are explained to you.

 

[First]

rofl. Please tell us what Newton's 3rd law is and how it relates to WTC7. F = m*a doesn't count, lol.

 

[kylebisme]

I'll defer to civil engineer to show you to explain how Newton's third law applies to WTC 7, WTC 1 & 2, and reality in general:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=62D0F5AB95CBAD7D

If you still don't understand it after that, hire a tutor.

 

[xj0hnx]

Rather, I was talking about explosives, to which you responded by trying to run away from it by dismissing highly energetic and exquisitely engineered explosives as dirt.

Except, thermite flies in the face of your "video evidence" as it doesn't go boom.

Rather, you can't explain away the mounds of evidence of either the conventional controlled demolition of WTC 7 or the unconventional ones of WTC 1 & 2, and continue to ignore obvious facts like that of shielding being capable of protecting explosives from sparks and heat, even after they are explained to you.

Shielding ...lol.

Why wouldn't "they" just use explosives? No need to explain any of the conspiracies. So instead they fly planes into the buildings, but then bring them down with explosives, that no one can find real evidence of? Ridiculous. It's be one thing if the conspiracies made sense, but they don't.

 

[PeshakJang]

I'll defer to civil engineer to show you to explain how Newton's third law applies to WTC 7, WTC 1 & 2, and reality in general:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=62D0F5AB95CBAD7D

If you still don't understand it after that, hire a tutor.

You haven't been able to answer my questions to date.

You lost, little child. You can't refute the facts so you change the subject, just as you have in every thread you've posted about this, in which you've been owned as massively as is possible in every case.

 

[kylebisme]

Except, thermite flies in the face of your "video evidence" as it doesn't go boom.

Nano-thermite based explosives go boom, and nano-thermite in the dust flies in the face of your misguided beliefs about what happened on 9/11, as does all the other evidence and the laws of physics which you continue to remain in denial of.

You haven't been able to answer my questions to date.

Rather, your ridiculous question discredits itself to anyone who has at least two healthy braincells to rub together, and I've no interest in discussion with those of you who don't.

 

[xj0hnx]

Nano-thermite based explosives go boom, and nano-thermite in the dust flies in the face of your misguided beliefs about what happened on 9/11, as does all the other evidence and the laws of physics which you continue to remain in denial of.

Please quote where thermite goes boom is in your link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhPjYpLsI2Y

Also, isn't the "molten steel" falling out one of the buildings the other "proof" that they used thermite? If it was used in this manner there most definitely would be no "boom".

 

[kylebisme]

Please quote where thermite goes boom is in your link.

Please acknolage the difference between thermite and nano-thermite, and note this right in the opening pargraph of the Wiki page on nano-thermite:

MICs, including nano-thermitic materials, are a type of reactive materials investigated for military use, as well as in applications in propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics

Also, please check the sources linked at the bottom of the page for further details.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhPjYpLsI2Y

And here is what even just regular thermite can do when constrained by a casing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oipHDxBxfb4

Also, isn't the "molten steel" falling out one of the buildings the other "proof" that they used thermite?

Rather, it's evidence of how the demolitions were done, suggestive of a thermite based incendiary known as thermate having been used as a corrosive to compromise portions of the structures before blasting them apart, and these pieces of Swiss-cheesed steel documented by FEMA are evidence of that too.

 

[xj0hnx]

Please acknolage the difference between thermite and nano-thermite, and note this right in the opening pargraph of the Wiki page on nano-thermite:


Also, please check the sources linked at the bottom of the page for further details.


And here is what even just regular thermite can do when constrained by a casing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oipHDxBxfb4


Rather, it's evidence of how the demolitions were done, suggestive of a thermite based incendiary known as thermate having been used as a corrosive to compromise portions of the structures before blasting them apart, and these pieces of Swiss-cheesed steel documented by FEMA are evidence of that too.

🙄

http://www.rense.com/general77/geddno.htm

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

So they rigged the steel with thermite to weaken it, and then had explosives to finish it off, as well as flying planes into the buildings? All this done under the cover of an elevator repair in all the buildings? Jesus H Christ.

Why would they use some exotic like nano-thermite, when they could just use regular C4, RDX, or Comp-B? Why would they triple rigged a building that wasn't even hit by a plane? Your story is insane.

 

[ShawnD1]

I think it's fair to say this is the worst thread in the history of Anandtech. I keep getting tin foil hat responses in my email. 15 pages of conspiracy nutjob bullshit? Really?

 

[kylebisme]

So they rigged the steel with thermite to weaken it...

Rather, the aforementioned evidence and more is...

...suggestive of a thermite based incendiary known as thermate having been used as a corrosive to compromise portions of the structures before blasting them apart...

...with nano-thermite based explosves.

Can you bring yourself to acknowledge the difference between thermite, thermate, and nano-thermite? One can't rightly expect you to discuss this matter reasonably until you do.

Why would they triple rigged a building that wasn't even hit by a plane?

Whoever rigged the buildings obviously did so because to bring the buildings down, and hitting steel-framed highrises with planes can't even come close to accomplishing that goal, and rather the planes only served the purpose of misdirection.

 

[Drako]

I think it's fair to say this is the worst thread in the history of Anandtech. I keep getting tin foil hat responses in my email. 15 pages of conspiracy nutjob bullshit? Really?

I don't know if it's the worst, because to me it has been highly entertaining.

It's interesting to see who tries to reason with the lunatics 😀

 

[xj0hnx]

Rather, the aforementioned evidence and more is...


...with nano-thermite based explosves.

Can you bring yourself to acknowledge the difference between thermite, thermate, and nano-thermite? One can't rightly expect you to discuss this matter reasonably until you do.

Oh, I know what it is, and how it's used, and how we used it in the military (thermite). I don't think you can comprehend how much explosives would be needed to do what you are claiming was done. Can you point me to a source of these nano-themite demolitions that does not have anything to do with 9/11? Maybe a FM, or some info site on nano-thermite being used as an explosive for demolition. Remeber, one that does NOT have anything to do with 9/11.

Whoever rigged the buildings obviously did so because to bring the buildings down, and hitting steel-framed highrises with planes can't even come close to accomplishing that goal, and rather the planes only served the purpose of misdirection.

LOLOLOLOL

That's just the stupidest rationalization I have ever heard ...ok, maybe not the most stupid, but pretty up there. Why not just use ...explosives? I mean, if they managed to get a crew in there to plant tons of explosives, why not just use a couple van filled with the same explosives, therefore by passing all this insanity of convoluted theories? This people were apparently smart enough to know that planes alone wouldn't do it right?, and surely they would have known that evidence of their explosives would be found ...oh wait, it wasn't.

 

[First]

I'll defer to civil engineer to show you to explain how Newton's third law applies to WTC 7, WTC 1 & 2, and reality in general:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=62D0F5AB95CBAD7D

If you still don't understand it after that, hire a tutor.

Except the 3rd law wasn't explained there in relation to any of the WTC's. Explain it in your own words. If you can.