Fire - not explosives - brought 7 WTC down on 9/11, says report

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Strangely, Huntleigth USA, an airport passenger screening company owned by Israel?s International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS), led by ?former Israeli military commanders and members of its intelligence and security agencies,? received congressional immunity for failed airport security at Boston and Newark airports where three of the four doomed planes originated on September 11.
Actually, ICTS is a Dutch company, not an Israeli company. Addionally Huntleigh USA only oversaw checkpoint security for United at Boston Logan airport. American Airlines security at Logan was provided by Globe Aviation Services (British). Security at Dulles and Newark was provided by Argenbright (Swedish). So, as you can see, it was not unusual in the least for foreign owned companies to provide security for US airports.

So, once again, the 9/11 conspiracy goobers can't get the actual facts of the matter straight. They embellish, and flat out lie to attempt to raise a spectre where none really exists. Besides that, stop trotting out articles from the kool-aid swilling nutjob websites. Tom Flocco has no credibility. He's a wing-nut and a proven liar.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings. Is that simply a coincidence or were the computer rooms equipped to play a role in the crime?
"The fuselage was centered on the 96th floor slab and filled the 95th and 96th floors top to bottom," the NIST report says. So, what was on the 95th and 96th floors of the north tower, which were rented by Marsh & McLennan, Lewis Paul "Jerry" Bremer's company? Reginald McQuay came on the line as a company spokesman.
I told McQuay that Marsh & McLennan got hit broadside on 9/11 and that it appeared that the plane flew straight into their "walled data center," according to the NIST report.
"No," McQuay said, "it wasn't really our data center. It was our computer center." Then he suddenly became somewhat distressed, saying he could not even focus on what I was saying and that I should call back next week.
Although Flight 175 went straight into the 81st floor of the south tower, the NIST report provides no description of what was on the 81st floor. Not even one word. How odd.
While we know that the Fuji Bank was the tenant on floors 79-82 of WTC 2, the NIST report fails to describe the "tenant layout" of floors 79, 81, and 82.
I had repeatedly requested information from NIST about the layout of these floors, primarily because many tons of molten metal were seen falling from the 81st floor prior to the collapse.
The source of the large amount of molten metal on the 81st floor had not been explained. What could have possibly melted in such large amounts on a normal floor to create several cubic meters of molten metal?
Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor, he said, and stripped it down to the bare bone to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.
These units were bolted to the raised floor which stood about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. Beneath the raised floor ran the cables and power supply that connected the army of batteries. IT techies had to get down on all fours and crawl around beneath the raised floor to connect cables.
"The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9/11, he said.
But were they really batteries?
"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html




 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,635
3,507
136
This was many years ago, and it is really time to get over it (and has been for a while). Surely the OP's vast creative energies would be better focused on other areas, like solving the crisis in Darfur, curing Malaria, or developing cold fusion. Something else. Anything else.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings. Is that simply a coincidence or were the computer rooms equipped to play a role in the crime?
"The fuselage was centered on the 96th floor slab and filled the 95th and 96th floors top to bottom," the NIST report says. So, what was on the 95th and 96th floors of the north tower, which were rented by Marsh & McLennan, Lewis Paul "Jerry" Bremer's company? Reginald McQuay came on the line as a company spokesman.
I told McQuay that Marsh & McLennan got hit broadside on 9/11 and that it appeared that the plane flew straight into their "walled data center," according to the NIST report.
"No," McQuay said, "it wasn't really our data center. It was our computer center." Then he suddenly became somewhat distressed, saying he could not even focus on what I was saying and that I should call back next week.
Although Flight 175 went straight into the 81st floor of the south tower, the NIST report provides no description of what was on the 81st floor. Not even one word. How odd.
While we know that the Fuji Bank was the tenant on floors 79-82 of WTC 2, the NIST report fails to describe the "tenant layout" of floors 79, 81, and 82.
I had repeatedly requested information from NIST about the layout of these floors, primarily because many tons of molten metal were seen falling from the 81st floor prior to the collapse.
The source of the large amount of molten metal on the 81st floor had not been explained. What could have possibly melted in such large amounts on a normal floor to create several cubic meters of molten metal?
Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor, he said, and stripped it down to the bare bone to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.
These units were bolted to the raised floor which stood about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. Beneath the raised floor ran the cables and power supply that connected the army of batteries. IT techies had to get down on all fours and crawl around beneath the raised floor to connect cables.
"The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9/11, he said.
But were they really batteries?
"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html

Now you're just making stuff up. Where is there evidence that "tons" of molten material fell from the 81st floor?
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.
Did you even pay even the least bit of attention to what I told you? Doesn't seem as if you did. If there were explosions then it completely invalidates your theory about thermate because thermate doesn't explode. Nor does someone claiming that they thought they heard an explosion mean a damn thing.

Start explaining that discrepancy in your own words and stop cutting and pasting from wingnut websites that are headed by proven habitual liars and distorters of facts. Start explaining how demolitions could have been rigged in advance to begin the collapse on BOTH towers precisely where the airliners hit the building too. Stop evading and avoiding. If you can't do any of that, just plain stop because once again you are not providing answers, you are flinging conspiracies to and fro, none of which have any credibility and none of which are answers to my questions.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,357
8,446
126
Originally posted by: event8horizon
3. Symmetrical ?collapse? ? through the path of greatest resistance ? at nearly free-fall speed ? the columns gave no resistance

it took at least 18 seconds to fall, hardly 'free-fall speed'



Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Start explaining how demolitions could have been rigged in advance to begin the collapse on BOTH towers precisely where the airliners hit the building too.


obviously the whole upper half of each building was rigged, and there was a control system in place that allowed THEM to blow any single floor at a time.

obviously.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Strangely, Huntleigth USA, an airport passenger screening company owned by Israel?s International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS), led by ?former Israeli military commanders and members of its intelligence and security agencies,? received congressional immunity for failed airport security at Boston and Newark airports where three of the four doomed planes originated on September 11.
Actually, ICTS is a Dutch company, not an Israeli company. Addionally Huntleigh USA only oversaw checkpoint security for United at Boston Logan airport. American Airlines security at Logan was provided by Globe Aviation Services (British). Security at Dulles and Newark was provided by Argenbright (Swedish). So, as you can see, it was not unusual in the least for foreign owned companies to provide security for US airports.

So, once again, the 9/11 conspiracy goobers can't get the actual facts of the matter straight. They embellish, and flat out lie to attempt to raise a spectre where none really exists. Besides that, stop trotting out articles from the kool-aid swilling nutjob websites. Tom Flocco has no credibility. He's a wing-nut and a proven liar.

how about this-
http://www.thebarrychamishwebs...etters/atzmon70506.htm

Menachem Atzmon resigned as president of Friedman's IDF following his
1996 conviction of Friedman's IDF following his conviction for
Israeli election campaign finance fraud.But his later U.S. activities
would prove to be much more disturbing.Atzmon and his business partner Ezra Harel are the majority owners(57%)of ICTS - International
Consultants on Targeted Security, run by 'former(Israeli)military
commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and
security agencies' according to its website.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 September 11,2001, and demolished the World Trade Center
Towers in New York.........

 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,543
651
126
Originally posted by: event8horizon

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings

Wow, that's some great flying.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings. Is that simply a coincidence or were the computer rooms equipped to play a role in the crime?
"The fuselage was centered on the 96th floor slab and filled the 95th and 96th floors top to bottom," the NIST report says. So, what was on the 95th and 96th floors of the north tower, which were rented by Marsh & McLennan, Lewis Paul "Jerry" Bremer's company? Reginald McQuay came on the line as a company spokesman.
I told McQuay that Marsh & McLennan got hit broadside on 9/11 and that it appeared that the plane flew straight into their "walled data center," according to the NIST report.
"No," McQuay said, "it wasn't really our data center. It was our computer center." Then he suddenly became somewhat distressed, saying he could not even focus on what I was saying and that I should call back next week.
Although Flight 175 went straight into the 81st floor of the south tower, the NIST report provides no description of what was on the 81st floor. Not even one word. How odd.
While we know that the Fuji Bank was the tenant on floors 79-82 of WTC 2, the NIST report fails to describe the "tenant layout" of floors 79, 81, and 82.
I had repeatedly requested information from NIST about the layout of these floors, primarily because many tons of molten metal were seen falling from the 81st floor prior to the collapse.
The source of the large amount of molten metal on the 81st floor had not been explained. What could have possibly melted in such large amounts on a normal floor to create several cubic meters of molten metal?
Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor, he said, and stripped it down to the bare bone to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.
These units were bolted to the raised floor which stood about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. Beneath the raised floor ran the cables and power supply that connected the army of batteries. IT techies had to get down on all fours and crawl around beneath the raised floor to connect cables.
"The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9/11, he said.
But were they really batteries?
"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html

Now you're just making stuff up. Where is there evidence that "tons" of molten material fell from the 81st floor?


i didnt write that article. but yeah u are right, i dont know about tons but this is what he is talking about.
http://video.google.com/videos...rmite+wtc&hl=en&emb=0#
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: event8horizon

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings

Wow, that's some great flying.

Indeed it is. For inexperienced pilots, they were amazingly accurate. Not only did they take out "secure computer rooms" but they supposedly took out the accounting office at the Pentagon too. /sarcasm

But lets not forget every company has a secure computer room. So what's your point event8?????
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings. Is that simply a coincidence or were the computer rooms equipped to play a role in the crime?
"The fuselage was centered on the 96th floor slab and filled the 95th and 96th floors top to bottom," the NIST report says. So, what was on the 95th and 96th floors of the north tower, which were rented by Marsh & McLennan, Lewis Paul "Jerry" Bremer's company? Reginald McQuay came on the line as a company spokesman.
I told McQuay that Marsh & McLennan got hit broadside on 9/11 and that it appeared that the plane flew straight into their "walled data center," according to the NIST report.
"No," McQuay said, "it wasn't really our data center. It was our computer center." Then he suddenly became somewhat distressed, saying he could not even focus on what I was saying and that I should call back next week.
Although Flight 175 went straight into the 81st floor of the south tower, the NIST report provides no description of what was on the 81st floor. Not even one word. How odd.
While we know that the Fuji Bank was the tenant on floors 79-82 of WTC 2, the NIST report fails to describe the "tenant layout" of floors 79, 81, and 82.
I had repeatedly requested information from NIST about the layout of these floors, primarily because many tons of molten metal were seen falling from the 81st floor prior to the collapse.
The source of the large amount of molten metal on the 81st floor had not been explained. What could have possibly melted in such large amounts on a normal floor to create several cubic meters of molten metal?
Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor, he said, and stripped it down to the bare bone to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.
These units were bolted to the raised floor which stood about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. Beneath the raised floor ran the cables and power supply that connected the army of batteries. IT techies had to get down on all fours and crawl around beneath the raised floor to connect cables.
"The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9/11, he said.
But were they really batteries?
"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."
http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html

Now you're just making stuff up. Where is there evidence that "tons" of molten material fell from the 81st floor?


i didnt write that article. but yeah u are right, i dont know about tons but this is what he is talking about.
http://video.google.com/videos...rmite+wtc&hl=en&emb=0#

Let's see, airliner slams into building full of jet fuel and people are surprised that the place heats up and starts melting things? I fail to see what this video demonstrates, besides the fact that the fires burning in the WTC were incredibly hot and definitely hot enough for steel to lose nearly all its structural integrity.
 

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
Alright, I'm going to come clean once and for all to end this dumb debate.

The Jews did it. We did it to get Bush & Co. to go to war in Iraq, so we could steal all their oil.

Happy now?
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.
Did you even pay even the least bit of attention to what I told you? Doesn't seem as if you did. If there were explosions then it completely invalidates your theory about thermate because thermate doesn't explode. Nor does someone claiming that they thought they heard an explosion mean a damn thing.

Start explaining that discrepancy in your own words and stop cutting and pasting from wingnut websites that are headed by proven habitual liars and distorters of facts. Start explaining how demolitions could have been rigged in advance to begin the collapse on BOTH towers precisely where the airliners hit the building too. Stop evading and avoiding. If you can't do any of that, just plain stop because once again you are not providing answers, you are flinging conspiracies to and fro, none of which have any credibility and none of which are answers to my questions.

tlc-i havent forgot about ya!! i just got alot i have to do today!! im trying to get through your long rebuttal. its just going to take awhile.
thats all hypothetical and off topic for this thread b/c we are concentrating on wtc 7 that did not get hit by an airplane. but i admit, it was damaged. only we dont know how much because they did not analyze the steel. did the steel buckle or was it cut?? we will never know.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: event8horizon

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings

Wow, that's some great flying.

Truthers can't even keep the story straight.

No pilot will claim to be able to hit such a spot as the Pentagon base ? under any conditions ? in a 757 doing 300 Knots. As to the clearly alleged amateur pilots: IMPOSSIBLE!
http://www.physics911.net/omholt

One side note regarding the actions of a novice pilot attempting to hit the Pentagon: If you were throwing a dart at a toilet seat, would you aim at the side of the seat or would you aim down at the top of the seat, you know?the part that many men try to avoid hitting? Any pilot - especially a less skilled one - looking at the Pentagon as the target of a projectile, surely would have planned a simple, top-down, dive-bomb approach. The Pentagon is shaped like a set of of toilet seats, one smaller than the other, each one residing in the void of the next larger. The side of the Pentagon is 77' high yet the topside surface target space is approximately 29 acres. What would anyone reasonably aim for - a 29 acre target or the relatively miniscule one - on the ONLY reinforced section of the building designed to withstand a frontal attack?
http://tvnewslies.org/blog/?p=355

[In reality, a clueless non-pilot would encounter almost insurmountable difficulties in attempting to navigate and fly a 200,000-lb airliner into a building located on the ground, 7 miles below and hundreds of miles away and out of sight, and in an unknown direction, while flying at over 500 MPH - and all this under extremely stressful circumstances.--Joel Harel, "The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training," physics911.net]

Can you at least get your damn story straight? Either the pilots were too inexperienced to have hit the side of the Pentagon, or they were so good that, not only could they hit the side of the building, but they could hit the specific office they wanted.

(I'm not even going to go into how stupid most of the quotes are that I cited)
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: QuantumPion
Alright, I'm going to come clean once and for all to end this dumb debate.

The Jews did it. We did it to get Bush & Co. to go to war in Iraq, so we could steal all their oil.

Happy now?

lol....your forgeting the perceived "existential" threat, that of which is iran.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.
Did you even pay even the least bit of attention to what I told you? Doesn't seem as if you did. If there were explosions then it completely invalidates your theory about thermate because thermate doesn't explode. Nor does someone claiming that they thought they heard an explosion mean a damn thing.

Start explaining that discrepancy in your own words and stop cutting and pasting from wingnut websites that are headed by proven habitual liars and distorters of facts. Start explaining how demolitions could have been rigged in advance to begin the collapse on BOTH towers precisely where the airliners hit the building too. Stop evading and avoiding. If you can't do any of that, just plain stop because once again you are not providing answers, you are flinging conspiracies to and fro, none of which have any credibility and none of which are answers to my questions.

tlc-i havent forgot about ya!! i just got alot i have to do today!! im trying to get through your long rebuttal. its just going to take awhile.
thats all hypothetical and off topic for this thread b/c we are concentrating on wtc 7 that did not get hit by an airplane. but i admit, it was damaged. only we dont know how much because they did not analyze the steel. did the steel buckle or was it cut?? we will never know.

From testimony and pictures, we know there was a deep gash running down one side of the building that covered approximately 8 stories. We know from pictures that the fires inside WTC 7 were severe and that firefighting efforts were hampered.

If anything, I'd say we've developed a pretty clear picture of what went on WTC 7.

As for the truther version, nobody has explained to me how the supposed detonation cord and C4 (thermite, silent thermite, or whatever) survived the fires for nearly half a day until finally be detonated.
 
Dec 10, 2005
25,023
8,298
136
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.
Did you even pay even the least bit of attention to what I told you? Doesn't seem as if you did. If there were explosions then it completely invalidates your theory about thermate because thermate doesn't explode. Nor does someone claiming that they thought they heard an explosion mean a damn thing.

Start explaining that discrepancy in your own words and stop cutting and pasting from wingnut websites that are headed by proven habitual liars and distorters of facts. Start explaining how demolitions could have been rigged in advance to begin the collapse on BOTH towers precisely where the airliners hit the building too. Stop evading and avoiding. If you can't do any of that, just plain stop because once again you are not providing answers, you are flinging conspiracies to and fro, none of which have any credibility and none of which are answers to my questions.

tlc-i havent forgot about ya!! i just got alot i have to do today!! im trying to get through your long rebuttal. its just going to take awhile.
thats all hypothetical and off topic for this thread b/c we are concentrating on wtc 7 that did not get hit by an airplane. but i admit, it was damaged. only we dont know how much because they did not analyze the steel. did the steel buckle or was it cut?? we will never know.

They didn't have to because FEMA did. And it was already shown from previous investigations into the Twin Towers that heating steal to 700C causes steel to lose half it's strength. Combined with the FACT that there were out-of-control fires burning for hours on end in WTC7 and the images showing bulging of the building at the points of strutural failure makes analyzing irrelevant. You're just a tin-foil hat wearing loon and really should read some of the REAL evidence from the REAL people who were doing the investigation (PhDs and experts in their fields) instead of someone that got a degree in bullshit from the University of Phoenix Online.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: event8horizon

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings

Wow, that's some great flying.

Indeed it is. For inexperienced pilots, they were amazingly accurate. Not only did they take out "secure computer rooms" but they supposedly took out the accounting office at the Pentagon too. /sarcasm

But lets not forget every company has a secure computer room. So what's your point event8?????

it almost sounds like the whole floor was a "secure computer room". how many whole floors in the wtc's were comp rooms??? how many companies could actually afford a whole floor just for computers. hell, i dont know but i bet not many. when u approach a problem, dont u look at all the angles??
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: event8horizon

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings

Wow, that's some great flying.

Indeed it is. For inexperienced pilots, they were amazingly accurate. Not only did they take out "secure computer rooms" but they supposedly took out the accounting office at the Pentagon too. /sarcasm

But lets not forget every company has a secure computer room. So what's your point event8?????

it almost sounds like the whole floor was a "secure computer room". how many whole floors in the wtc's were comp rooms??? how many companies could actually afford a whole floor just for computers. hell, i dont know but i bet not many. when u approach a problem, dont u look at all the angles??

read my post two up and answer the question, "were the 9/11 pilots too inept to hit the side of the building or so good that they could hit one office?"

On the one hand, you indite the Pentagon pilots for being too poor to hit the building and then on the other you claim that the WTC pilots hit ONE SPECIFIC OFFICE?! Are you serious?
 
Dec 10, 2005
25,023
8,298
136
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: event8horizon

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings

Wow, that's some great flying.

Indeed it is. For inexperienced pilots, they were amazingly accurate. Not only did they take out "secure computer rooms" but they supposedly took out the accounting office at the Pentagon too. /sarcasm

But lets not forget every company has a secure computer room. So what's your point event8?????

it almost sounds like the whole floor was a "secure computer room". how many whole floors in the wtc's were comp rooms??? how many companies could actually afford a whole floor just for computers. hell, i dont know but i bet not many. when u approach a problem, dont u look at all the angles??

You look at all angles, but you discard the improbable and stupid angles. The terrorists knowing how to fly a plane straight into where a computer room happened to be :roll:. It was fairly likely that they would hit some kind of computer room since many companies had offices in the WTC.
 

event8horizon

Senior member
Nov 15, 2007
674
0
0
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.
Did you even pay even the least bit of attention to what I told you? Doesn't seem as if you did. If there were explosions then it completely invalidates your theory about thermate because thermate doesn't explode. Nor does someone claiming that they thought they heard an explosion mean a damn thing.

Start explaining that discrepancy in your own words and stop cutting and pasting from wingnut websites that are headed by proven habitual liars and distorters of facts. Start explaining how demolitions could have been rigged in advance to begin the collapse on BOTH towers precisely where the airliners hit the building too. Stop evading and avoiding. If you can't do any of that, just plain stop because once again you are not providing answers, you are flinging conspiracies to and fro, none of which have any credibility and none of which are answers to my questions.

tlc-i havent forgot about ya!! i just got alot i have to do today!! im trying to get through your long rebuttal. its just going to take awhile.
thats all hypothetical and off topic for this thread b/c we are concentrating on wtc 7 that did not get hit by an airplane. but i admit, it was damaged. only we dont know how much because they did not analyze the steel. did the steel buckle or was it cut?? we will never know.

They didn't have to because FEMA did. And it was already shown from previous investigations into the Twin Towers that heating steal to 700C causes steel to lose half it's strength. Combined with the FACT that there were out-of-control fires burning for hours on end in WTC7 and the images showing bulging of the building at the points of strutural failure makes analyzing irrelevant. You're just a tin-foil hat wearing loon and really should read some of the REAL evidence from the REAL people who were doing the investigation (PhDs and experts in their fields) instead of someone that got a degree in bullshit from the University of Phoenix Online.

link those images of the "bulging". we dont know what the nist saw. they havent let that become public yet. "analyzing irrelevant" man i bet u would make a good scientist. one has to take all the facts into consideration like that fema sample 1 that showed steel that had "liquified". now if they actually treated the site like a crime scene then maybe they would have that column 79 to analyze. and just think if column 79 also showed the same characteristics.......wouldnt that be something.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc- ill answer your questions a few at a time. gotta do the mr mom thing today.

the movie also had wtc 7 in it.
1. did u listen to that eyewittness account of hearing a loud explosion at the base of wtc7.
there are multiple videos/accounts of "explosions".
as for the whole "did they rig demoliton where the airliners hit.....this is an interesting article.
Did you even pay even the least bit of attention to what I told you? Doesn't seem as if you did. If there were explosions then it completely invalidates your theory about thermate because thermate doesn't explode. Nor does someone claiming that they thought they heard an explosion mean a damn thing.

Start explaining that discrepancy in your own words and stop cutting and pasting from wingnut websites that are headed by proven habitual liars and distorters of facts. Start explaining how demolitions could have been rigged in advance to begin the collapse on BOTH towers precisely where the airliners hit the building too. Stop evading and avoiding. If you can't do any of that, just plain stop because once again you are not providing answers, you are flinging conspiracies to and fro, none of which have any credibility and none of which are answers to my questions.

tlc-i havent forgot about ya!! i just got alot i have to do today!! im trying to get through your long rebuttal. its just going to take awhile.
thats all hypothetical and off topic for this thread b/c we are concentrating on wtc 7 that did not get hit by an airplane. but i admit, it was damaged. only we dont know how much because they did not analyze the steel. did the steel buckle or was it cut?? we will never know.

They didn't have to because FEMA did. And it was already shown from previous investigations into the Twin Towers that heating steal to 700C causes steel to lose half it's strength. Combined with the FACT that there were out-of-control fires burning for hours on end in WTC7 and the images showing bulging of the building at the points of strutural failure makes analyzing irrelevant. You're just a tin-foil hat wearing loon and really should read some of the REAL evidence from the REAL people who were doing the investigation (PhDs and experts in their fields) instead of someone that got a degree in bullshit from the University of Phoenix Online.

link those images of the "bulging". we dont know what the nist saw. they havent let that become public yet. "analyzing irrelevant" man i bet u would make a good scientist. one has to take all the facts into consideration like that fema sample 1 that showed steel that had "liquified". now if they actually treated the site like a crime scene then maybe they would have that column 79 to analyze. and just think if column 79 also showed the same characteristics.......wouldnt that be something.

I'm not going to argue this point again, the NIST did not ignore the melted steel. In fact, they addressed it head on:

11. Why do some photographs show a yellow stream of molten metal pouring down the side of WTC2 that NIST claims was aluminum from the crashed plane although aluminum burns with a white glow?

NIST reported (NCSTAR 1-5A) that just before 9:52 a.m., a bright spot appeared at the top of a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2, four windows removed from the east edge on the north face, followed by the flow of a glowing liquid. This flow lasted approximately four seconds before subsiding. Many such liquid flows were observed from near this location in the seven minutes leading up to the collapse of this tower. There is no evidence of similar molten liquid pouring out from another location in WTC 2 or from anywhere within WTC 1.

Photographs, and NIST simulations of the aircraft impact, show large piles of debris in the 80th and 81st floors of WTC 2 near the site where the glowing liquid eventually appeared. Much of this debris came from the aircraft itself and from the office furnishings that the aircraft pushed forward as it tunneled to this far end of the building. Large fires developed on these piles shortly after the aircraft impact and continued to burn in the area until the tower collapsed.

NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.

Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface.

13. Why did the NIST investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the WTC towers?

NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)?who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards?found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse. The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.

NIST considered the damage to the steel structure and its fireproofing caused by the aircraft impact and the subsequent fires when the buildings were still standing since that damage was responsible for initiating the collapse of the WTC towers.

Under certain circumstances it is conceivable for some of the steel in the wreckage to have melted after the buildings collapsed. Any molten steel in the wreckage was more likely due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile than to short exposure to fires or explosions while the buildings were standing.

Some of the foremost individuals on building disaster investigation concluded that the molten steel in the rubble provides no information about the condition of the steel in the buildings AND that the "molten steel" seeping out of the towers was aluminum from the plane.
 

Fox5

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
5,957
7
81
I've actually been to NIST and seen the steel from the WTC. It's just sitting in a pile way out back in the middle of nowhere on NIST's campus. It's all twisted and red. I'd imagine the steel didn't melt, but got hot enough to bend, compromising the structural stability. Compression loads are interesting in that way, there's no gradual failure, it just suddenly buckles like playdoe, and it doesn't take a large decrease in the strength of the material for that to happen. (as opposed to tension loads, which tend to have a more gradual failure)
 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,543
651
126
Originally posted by: event8horizon
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: event8horizon

The two airplanes that struck the twin towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11 flew directly into secure computer rooms in both buildings

Wow, that's some great flying.

Indeed it is. For inexperienced pilots, they were amazingly accurate. Not only did they take out "secure computer rooms" but they supposedly took out the accounting office at the Pentagon too. /sarcasm

But lets not forget every company has a secure computer room. So what's your point event8?????

it almost sounds like the whole floor was a "secure computer room". how many whole floors in the wtc's were comp rooms??? how many companies could actually afford a whole floor just for computers. hell, i dont know but i bet not many. when u approach a problem, dont u look at all the angles??

You actually believe that the terrorists picked the actual floor/location to crash their plane into the WTC?

Maybe, it's such a huge conspiracy that what we actually saw on tv was just cgi and that it was a planted explosion on that floor instead. OMG, the tv stations and eyewitnesses from the street are in on the conspiracy too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
As we all are seeing, people like event8horizon cannot keep their story straight. It changes constantly and completely discredits their theory of a conspiracy of Jews, Bush and anyone else they do not like.

Perhaps if we ignore the loons, they will just go away.....