TerrorStorm: Free movie

[PolyNewbie]

There is plenty of known physical evidence to prove controlled demolition but it does add to the look of guilt when the scene was significantly disturbed on purpose before an investigation could take place- by the same folks that cleaned up Oklahoma no less. What was the rush ? Why the satallite tracking on large beams ?

You would think the lies about WMD and the border being left open while there is a war on terror would be enough to convince people. The border sitting there ready for Osama Bin Laden to invade while there is a war on terror and billions are being spent to set up a police state so that society can be placed under authoritarian rule. HR 6166 was signed into law & there are prison camps all over the USA and Canada. I guess people think they can ignore the truth and stay safe from it.

Many people suffer from unjustified hubris and they are going to be their own victims.

[Riverwind]

Sorry guys but everybody should get to the bottom of this -- non-conspiracy theorists and conspiracy theorists alike.

Why? The 'theory' that the towers came down as a result of the planes hitting them meets the 'balance of probabilities' test with the evidence that is available today. I would agree that this theory has not been 'proven beyond all reasonable doubt' because of the various scientific oddities that the conspiracy crowd has dug up. However, showing that the 'plane-hitting-building' theory has not been proven beyond all reasonable doubt does not prove that it is wrong nor does it provide any evidence that alternate theories are any more likely.

IOW, we have a theory that meets the balance or probabilities test. However, we can't meet the 'beyond reasonable doubt' test because evidence has been destroyed. There is no evidence that this destruction was planned or deliberate - the most likely explaination is that gov't agencies screwed up in the days shortly after the event. So my question is why should we spend further resources on this issue? It is time to move on.

[Charles Anthony]

So my question is why should we spend further resources on this issue? It is time to move on.

To protect our freedom and to stop any underlings that can abuse our freedom.

I have a little concern about people who can by-pass public scrutiny in cases of crime.

[Riverwind]

There is plenty of known physical evidence to prove controlled demolition

There is some evidence that shows that a controlled demolition could have happened but there is no evdience that shows that controlled demolition is the only possible explaination (statements by conspiracy theorists that there is no other explaination does _not_ constitute proof of there being no other explaination).

but it does add to the look of guilt when the scene was significantly disturbed on purpose before an investigation could take place- by the same folks that cleaned up Oklahoma no less. What was the rush ?

Downtown Manhatten is a busy place where a significant percentage of the US economic activity takes place. Getting Manhatten online again as quickly as possible was the stated goal of many in gov't shortly after the event.

[Riverwind]

So my question is why should we spend further resources on this issue? It is time to move on.

To protect our freedom and to stop any underlings that can abuse our freedom. I have a little concern about people who can by-pass public scrutiny in cases of crime.

The 'balance of probability' test says that no crime was committed by gov't officials.

[Michael Hardner]

In the wake of the collapses, search and rescue workers launched an around-the-clock recovery effort to find and recover survivors and victims who perished. To make way, literally tons of twisted steel and fractured concrete were removed from the rubble pile and loaded onto convoys of bulldozers and flatbed trucks to be carried away to recycling plants and landfills.

Researchers also began to respond immediately. Among the first were National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded social scientists and engineers who arrived at the --- YADDA YADDA YADDA FLUFF FLUFF FLUFF YADDA YADDA YADDA --- lead to a better understanding of the collapse of the buildings themselves and to the development of mitigation strategies to prevent a similar tragedy in the future.

CA, It seems that rescue operations, and investigations were going on at the same time, then.

It doesn't seem untoward that there would have been confusion in such a state of affairs. If your complaint is that we don't know who specifically said "clear that pile of girders and take it away, there may be survivors there" then the answer is probably that we don't have any kind of institution in place to ask those questions, ie. that is challenging the official story.

If NBC decided to do a news segment on this issue, they would have three minutes to cover it, and it still wouldn't be believed because they're viewed as an organ of the state. We need a new kind of institution that would live on the web, to marshall information on these types of things, present FAQs, etc. Snopes.com does this for urban legends today, and it's an invaluable service.

I would welcome such an institution, because it could represent a responsible and neutral point of view, and eliminate irresponsible and disorganized attacks on the truth. I'll even add - from BOTH sides.

[Wilber]

Collapse

Seems simple and quite logical to me. You controlled demolition types are still going to have to explain to me how the buildings were collapsed from the top down. Perhaps you can point out to me a controlled demolition that was carried out in this fashion, because I can't think of one.

[Charles Anthony]

Perhaps you can point out to me a controlled demolition that was carried out in this fashion, because I can't think of one.

Take a look: there is smoke coming from the bottom of the tower. I am sure there are both official and kooky explanations for it.

The 'balance of probability' test says that no crime was committed by gov't officials.

That is over my head. I do not know what you are talking about.

I would welcome such an institution, because it could represent a responsible and neutral point of view, and eliminate irresponsible and disorganized attacks on the truth. I'll even add - from BOTH sides.

I am game.

[Michael Hardner]

CA:

I am game.

Me too.

Mike Williams has already covered a lot on his site, but we could pick something that we feel isn't adequately covered and look into it.

What would you pick ?

[Wilber]

Take a look: there is smoke coming from the bottom of the tower. I am sure there are both official and kooky explanations for it.

Take a look, the building collapsed from the top down.

[Led Boots]

Valid evidence is pointed out in FEMA, section 8 yet not addressed by NIST. This is the sulfidization of the metal and super hot pools of metal that were there months afterward. These point directly to CD which is why they are not addressed in NIST.

FEMA had to track down samples from disposal sites. Disposal trucks were closely observed using satallite tracking to make sure that wreckage metal got to china and was melted down.

The sky is not green, therefore the sky must be purple, the sky is always purple.

If the planes hit the buildings and the buildings did not fall it would affirm Americas strength rather than show weakness and therefore not have the same psychological impact as total destruction. The motive for 911 was to create fear and the need for a police state as well as to start a series of wars (all while leaving the borders wide open).

To back this up I will state that the stain on my coffee table is walnut, yet the grain pattern indicates it is made of teak. All walnut stained coffee tables are made of teak and therefore the sky is always purple.

As an electrical engineer you must have some understanding of the scientific method and falsifiability Polynewbie. That being the case you must also realize that not all your swans are white.

In your opinion why is the presence of sulfur so unusual?

There was sulfur in many of the products consumed in the fires. The rubber backing on carpet for example: less than 5% in soft rubber but ranging from 15 to 50% in hard rubber (stapler and hole punch bases, pens and mechanical pencils, chair mats…), what data can you provide that would render this fact insignificant?

Steel has sulfur in it.

Out of the pot and into the fire. The picture posted here clearly shows a red hot chunk of steel and not a molten pool. A witness describes a molten steel beam…I’ve never seen a molten steel beam…anybody here ever seen a molten steel beam?

The link also provides links to organizations that have conducted tests with the purpose of determining the temperatures of debris piles. The temperatures are definitely hot enough to turn steel red hot.

You are as bad as the conspiracy sites Polynewbie. You fling shit at a wall and point to the pieces that stick as proof that shit is actually made out of glue.

BTW, the cocktail weenies I have in my kitchen right now were also tracked by satellite from their origin to the supermarket where I purchased them. Do you want to confiscate my weenies?

Charles, I'll belly up to the bar a little later. Can I buy you a drink sir?

[Michael Hardner]

If the planes hit the buildings and the buildings did not fall it would affirm Americas strength rather than show weakness and therefore not have the same psychological impact as total destruction. The motive for 911 was to create fear and the need for a police state as well as to start a series of wars (all while leaving the borders wide open).

I've read this rationale before and it's not believable at all, in my opinion.

If somebody told you, on September 10th, that jets would be hijacked to hit those buildings you would have been horrified by that thought. It would not have been necessary to add that the buildings collapsed. The horror would come from the fact that American had not been attacked before, and the prevailing sentiment at that time that America was untouchable in that regard.

The extra effort to fell the buildings would not add much more to the horror of the incident, and it would expose the operation to so much more risk of being discovered.

It just doesn't add up.

[Charles Anthony]

Just for the sake of playing the devil's advocate.

If somebody told you, on September 10th, that jets would be hijacked to hit those buildings you would have been horrified by that thought. It would not have been necessary to add that the buildings collapsed.

I could follow the same logic and ask: why TWO airplanes?? One would be enough.

but we could pick something that we feel isn't adequately covered and look into it.

What would you pick ?

Tracing who (name or professional designation) authorized the first clearing of rubble to the scrap yards.

I still maintain that whoever it was (whether it happened through incompetence or deliberate concealment of evidence), that person has a peculiar authority.

Take a look, the building collapsed from the top down.

That is irrelevent. How did the smoke get to the bottom of the tower? The official story is that the fuel went down the elevator shaft. It could have more easily gone up the elevator shaft.

Charles, I'll belly up to the bar a little later. Can I buy you a drink sir?

Diet cola for now.

[Michael Hardner]

Just for the sake of playing the devil's advocate.

QUOTE(Michael Hardner @ Oct 19 2006, 10:43 AM) *

If somebody told you, on September 10th, that jets would be hijacked to hit those buildings you would have been horrified by that thought. It would not have been necessary to add that the buildings collapsed.

I could follow the same logic and ask: why TWO airplanes?? One would be enough.

Ah, but there the argument is reversed. Two airplanes against the twin towers is such an audacious act of terror that it sends an extra message of defiance.

That could be argued, but it wouldn't take that much extra planning or encur much more risk to hijack several planes over a single plane, once the MO was worked out.

Tracing who (name or professional designation) authorized the first clearing of rubble to the scrap yards.

I still maintain that whoever it was (whether it happened through incompetence or deliberate concealment of evidence), that person has a peculiar authority.

Well, it sounds from the description that the decision would have been made on site by someone in charge of rescue. Does that sound right to you ?

If so, we can scour news reports and email individuals to try to get an answer.

[Charles Anthony]

Ah, but there the argument is reversed. Two airplanes against the twin towers is such an audacious act of terror that it sends an extra message of defiance.

On second though, I agree.

Well, it sounds from the description that the decision would have been made on site by someone in charge of rescue. Does that sound right to you ?

That would be one place to look. Although, my first thought is to look at who paid the trucking companies.

Work backwards from the scrap yard. Somebody at the scrap yard admitted a truck driver. The truck driver was hired by a trucking company. The trucking company was hired by ------- ? Keep going backwards.

[Wilber]

That is irrelevent. How did the smoke get to the bottom of the tower? The official story is that the fuel went down the elevator shaft. It could have more easily gone up the elevator shaft.

Interesting, I didn't know kerosene was lighter than air.

[Michael Hardner]

That would be one place to look. Although, my first thought is to look at who paid the trucking companies.

Work backwards from the scrap yard. Somebody at the scrap yard admitted a truck driver. The truck driver was hired by a trucking company. The trucking company was hired by ------- ? Keep going backwards.

CA - now you're talking about real detective work. I'm not sure if that's practical. What do you think ?

[Led Boots]

Charles,

one diet pepsi comming up.

In the wake of the collapses, search and rescue workers launched an around-the-clock recovery effort to find and recover survivors and victims who perished. To make way, literally tons of twisted steel and fractured concrete were removed from the rubble pile and loaded onto convoys of bulldozers and flatbed trucks to be carried away to recycling plants and landfills.

Researchers also began to respond immediately. Among the first were National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded social scientists and engineers who arrived at the --- YADDA YADDA YADDA FLUFF FLUFF FLUFF YADDA YADDA YADDA --- lead to a better understanding of the collapse of the buildings themselves and to the development of mitigation strategies to prevent a similar tragedy in the future.

all of my beer

This is proof of incompetence and lack of written procedures, not conspiracy. The rescue crews were not interested in collecting samples; they were focused on finding survivors. Why was material removed at this point? Probably to make room for the rescue efforts. Why was the material discarded? Probably because there were no written procedures being followed at that time.

Yes, it automatically discredits the evidence.

I’ll give you a scenario, a Scottish RCMP officer arrives at the scene of a double fatality accident. Upon arrival he notices beer cans in one of the vehicles and being Scottish decides to collect them and take them to a bottle depot receiving 10 cents a can. Further investigation includes taking blood samples of the fatality injured parties; the victim in the car with the beer cans has a blood alcohol level exceeding the legal limit.

Does the removal of the beer cans automatically discredit the blood sample data?

[Personally, I am starting to no longer give a damn. If the American population permits their new Anti-Habeas Corpus law, I am starting to think that there are even more terrifying things to fear from the American bureaucracy in the future.]

Ditto on the Habeas Corpus thingy, now that’s scary, scary, scary!

How can you disagree?? Your own citation and your own statement proves otherwise. You are floating in The Nile.

Well that explains the alligator bite marks on my ass. I guess I have something in common with FEMA (I f#*cked up).

I am not talking about "collected x sample" for the public relations exercise. I am talking about the vultures who first sifted through the debris (and dead bodies, I would like to remind you) and chose to send stuff to the scrap yards, the recycling depots and the landfills BEFORE your "investigators" started. I can not find anything that identifies who or how but your citations said it happened.

So now the investigators are vultures, do you have any feather samples to back that up my friend? You say the intent of the investigators was to “filter” evidence and I say the investigators were running around willy nilly with no written procedure to follow and we got what we paid for. Do you have any proof that the intent of the investigators was subterfuge?

That is not a good enough excuse.

Somebody did it and they did not do it by accident. Those "officials" who sent stuff to scrap yards are likely still alive today. It has only been 5 years. The answer is out there and we just brush it under the rug.

Again, where’s your proof that the intent of the officials was to purposefully remove evidence intrinsic to the investigation for the purpose of subterfuge.

BTW, I agree with the direction this thread has taken since I last read it.

[Led Boots]

but we could pick something that we feel isn't adequately covered and look into it.

What would you pick ?

Tracing who (name or professional designation) authorized the first clearing of rubble to the scrap yards.

I still maintain that whoever it was (whether it happened through incompetence or deliberate concealment of evidence), that person has a peculiar authority.

Does this help?

[Michael Hardner]

Does this help?

I think so.

[Charles Anthony]

Does this help?

I think so.

Yeah. Congrats on finding it.

How many pages of extraneous kook search results did you have to go through to find it??

Work backwards from the scrap yard. Somebody at the scrap yard admitted a truck driver. The truck driver was hired by a trucking company. The trucking company was hired by ------- ? Keep going backwards.

CA - now you're talking about real detective work. I'm not sure if that's practical. What do you think ?

Honestly, I think it is impossible.

However, if the original "official" was somebody like you or me who missed $1 on a tax return, the I.R.S. would have the answer in a heartbeat.

I’ll give you a scenario, a Scottish RCMP officer arrives at the scene of a double fatality accident. Upon arrival he notices beer cans in one of the vehicles and being Scottish decides to collect them and take them to a bottle depot receiving 10 cents a can. Further investigation includes taking blood samples of the fatality injured parties; the victim in the car with the beer cans has a blood alcohol level exceeding the legal limit.

Does the removal of the beer cans automatically discredit the blood sample data?

Maybe not but that is not my point.

I want to know who is the vampire officer? His credibility is in doubt.

So now the investigators are vultures, do you have any feather samples to back that up my friend?

Only the fact that it happened. At that point, I could not find anything that even hinted at who such "officials" might be. Now, I must retract calling them vultures. I will just call them men-in-trench-coats for now.

You say the intent of the investigators was to “filter” evidence and I say the investigators were running around willy nilly with no written procedure to follow and we got what we paid for. Do you have any proof that the intent of the investigators was subterfuge?

No, not subterfuge. However, my point that there are "officials" with extremely high authority still stands. Now, I have to learn more about who this "Environmental Protection Aganecy's Criminal Investigation Division's Special Agent-in-Charge" happens to be. Sounds like an incredible title.

BTW, I agree with the direction this thread has taken since I last read it.

Yeah. I almost feel like a reverse-troll!

Just out of courtesy:

That is irrelevent. How did the smoke get to the bottom of the tower? The official story is that the fuel went down the elevator shaft. It could have more easily gone up the elevator shaft.

Interesting, I didn't know kerosene was lighter than air.

Have you ever lit a kerosene lamp? or a butane lighter? or seen an oil well set on fire?

The fires go up to meet the lowest air pressure. They do not go down into the kerosene tank or into your hand or down into the ground to explode the world.

[Wilber]

Have you ever lit a kerosene lamp? or a butane lighter? or seen an oil well set on fire?

The fires go up to meet the lowest air pressure. They do not go down into the kerosene tank or into your hand or down into the ground to explode the world.

Charles, as you say hot air rises however the burning fuel which produces it does not. In order for there to be smoke on the lower floors there would have to be fuel to create the smoke. As the aircraft did not hit at ground level and jet fuel is not lighter than air, there is no way the jet fuel could have gone up an elevator shaft. Any fuel unburned in the initial explosion would most definitely have tried to go down and an elevator shaft would have been the most direct and quickest route. If you throw a burning stick in the air it does not fly, it hits the ground like any other stick but it will keep burning. Unburned jet fuel is no different.

The only fuel I can think of the moment that is lighter than air and could actually go up an elevator shaft is hydrogen. To date there have been no hydrogen powered aircraft built that I know of.

The buildings collapsed from the top down. Look at the video.

[Led Boots]

Yeah. Congrats on finding it.

How many pages of extraneous kook search results did you have to go through to find it??

Only as many as you made me go through, libertarian my ass (j/k). I was on hold with the Canadian Revenue Agency while I looked so I had time to spare.

I actually figured something out (I think), when I used 911 WTC crime scene investigation in my search parameters all I got was pages and pages of indymedia, 911truth and links to the Alcaners (truthers) union hall…but when I used WTC September 11 2001crime scene investigation I got more legitimate results. I think using 911 in your search parameters spoils the results.

I want to know who is the vampire officer? His credibility is in doubt.

I see your point but the officer who collected the cans was busy at the bottle depot while another officer stayed at the crime scene and took blood samples from the fatally injured parties.

Only the fact that it happened. At that point, I could not find anything that even hinted at who such "officials" might be. Now, I must retract calling them vultures. I will just call them men-in-trench-coats for now.

Baby steps are important Charles.

Now, I have to learn more about who this "Environmental Protection Aganecy's Criminal Investigation Division's Special Agent-in-Charge" happens to be. Sounds like an incredible title.

I used to work with a guy that we, his co-workers, called “the super-cali-frag-ineer”. This sounds like the kind of title he would like. I’m game, lets dig around and see what we can come up with.

Yeah. I almost feel like a reverse-troll!

My impression of you is that you’re a full time devils advocate.

You stir things up in a good way Charles, now put down the doughnut and lets get back to work!

[PolyNewbie]

Judy Wood & Morgan Reynolds are doing a site that shows how the wtc buildings were brought down by a high energy beam weapon.

Judy Wood is a PhD engineer and Morgan Reynolds is an economist that served as chief economist at the white house in 2001/2002.

Anyone who has seen the video can clearly see that the buildings were converted to dust while they were standing. Others like Jim Hoffman have wondered how this could be done.

Judy Wood states that the buildings did not collapse, they were converted to dust while standing.

Listen to the interview here:http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/

[Canadian Blue]

Judy Wood & Morgan Reynolds are doing a site that shows how the wtc buildings were brought down by a high energy beam weapon.

Minime stop humping the frigian high energy beam weapon

Sorry, thats pretty damn funny, it's like something from Austin Powers.