9/11

Riverwind · January 9, 2007

If NIST says it couldn't have been CD then they are ignoring evidence shown by FEMA sect 8 (sulfidization). I'd like to know how they explain the high temperature sulfidization of beams without the explanation of explosives

The presence of sulfer does not mean anything because sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.

In any case, the presence of sulfar does not negate the main evidence that makes CD and extremely unlikely explaination:

NIST’s findings also do not support the “controlled demolition” theory since there is conclusive evidence that: the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else, and; the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors.

Riverwind · January 9, 2007

---

jbg · January 9, 2007

I have been trying to follow this thread. The tag-team / Punch-and-Judy comedy element has been the primary fuel for keeping my attention. I am ever so grateful that it did. Thank you Jbg for recounting your experience and your simple and straight-forward courtroom strategy. This is probably the most valuable and useful post in this whole thread -- in my opinion. In the end, freedom of speech and freedom to listen have won. We should all pay close attention, otherwise we may miss that tree falling in the forest. Long live spirited debate!
I wonder how the legal business will evolve if more and more people remember to keep the JBG Strategy in their back pocket.

Thank you, sincerely, for your compliment about my post (link). My overall advice, for "real life" debate, is that simplicity, a little "cowboy logic" goes a long way.

It sure beats complex, confusing arguments about the lack of ability of a building whammed by a fuel-filled jet to fall into its footprint.

jbg · January 9, 2007

I happen to like the USA very much. The only people that I can honestly say that I hate is Canadian lawyers. The reason for this is the moral relativism that they support in laws. If you are a Canadian lawyer the law doesn't hinder you in any way in what you may do or wish to do. Canadian lawyers are affectively above the law.

I know you don't like me or my posts very much, and have made reference to the fact that I am a lawyer. Did you think I am a "Canadian lawyer"?

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

jbg:I know you don't like me or my posts very much

Right.

You add nothing to the debate except anecdotal stories & insults. You will not debate the evidence. I don't care if you are a Canadian lawyer or an American one. A tree is judged by the fruit it bears.

Secondly, if you really are a lawyer, you are smart enough to look at the evidence before debating and you know that conspiracies really do exist. If you think Osama Bin Laden did 911, then you are going along with the official story because you think you are too important to be crushed by the forces of globalism.

911 wasn't just an inside job, it was OBVIOUSLY an inside job and made to look OBVIOUS. They didn't try to hide much - as if they were telling the "intelligencia"- "yes this was an inside job but just go along with it, buy some Haliburton, get rich and shut up".

jbg: the lack of ability of a building whammed by a fuel-filled jet to fall into its footprint.

Which is impossible for two reasons (1) The buildings were designed to withstand multiple impacts like this. (2) A building collapseing into its own footprint straight down violates the laws of thermodynamics - which is why you need a CD team to make that happen in real life.

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

Riverwind:The presence of sulfer does not mean anything because sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.

I didn't say sulfur, FEMA didn't say sulfur. It was sulfidization which is a high temperature process.

In any case, the presence of sulfar does not negate the main evidence that makes CD and extremely unlikely explaination:

That paragraph you quote is not evidence. Its a low grade opinion based on nothing.

jbg · January 9, 2007

jbg:I know you don't like me or my posts very much

Right.

You add nothing to the debate except anecdotal stories & insults. You will not debate the evidence. I don't care if you are a Canadian lawyer or an American one. A tree is judged by the fruit it bears.

I very rarely insult or flame. I don't know what you're talking about.

Secondly, if you really are a lawyer, you are smart enough to look at the evidence before debating and you know that conspiracies really do exist. If you think Osama Bin Laden did 911, then you are going along with the official story because you think you are too important to be crushed by the forces of globalism.
911 wasn't just an inside job, it was OBVIOUSLY an inside job and made to look OBVIOUS. They didn't try to hide much - as if they were telling the "intelligencia"- "yes this was an inside job but just go along with it, buy some Haliburton, get rich and shut up".

The "inside job" that I think happened was the decision, whether made directly or through inertia, not to follow up on the "chatter" among the terrorists that something "big" was about to happen. I think that both the Clinton and Bush administration's (largely Arabist) foreign policy "experts" had no interest in derailing their access to their "contacts" and "assets". Those "contacts" and "assets" have done little good, obviously, in warning the US of threats or moderating either specific attacks, or the overall climate, in the Middle East, since they control no one and control nothing other than perhaps some oil money.

I think that the maintenance of a "business as usual" posture was criminally negligent at the very least.

In other words, I don't think the attack was inside; I think the failure to prevent it was, since preventing it would mean attacking Saudi Arabia, something which has been studiously avoided.

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

jbg:If it's us or them, I choose us.

Its not "us or them". Its the corrupted arrogant oligarchy of our society going to war against the people and 911 was an excuse to got to war, make everyone forget about the three TRILLION dollars missing from the Pentagon and to make a lot of very rich people a whole lot richer. By oligarchy I mean central bankers - David Rockefeller admits this:

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose members have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion over forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop a plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work now is much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practised in past centuries"- David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, at the Trilteral commission in June 1991.

-So this grand plan is really something that is right out in the open. Its in PNAC, and in the Clash Of Civilizations.

The country is being destroyed from the inside. The infrastructure is being sold off to foreign corporations and foreign monarchies without it being on the evening news.

The army is being destroyed. The guys in Iraq are surrounded and sick from DU and from going from house to house pointing guns at people all the time while never knowing when they could be attacked. They are not comming back - they are there to be destroyed so that the country cannot revolt against the evil forces that are tearing it apart from within. The carriers in the Persian Gulf are sitting ducks. The Iranians can take them out anytime they want to with hypersonic missiles and fast torpedos.

Globalization and the need to "remain competitive" is a scam to get everybody working for less. How about the 100 million dollar a year CEO's being more competitive ?

The banks control all countries and the ones that are not under bank control are the ones we go to war with. Banks control countries by printing off fiat currencies for almost nothing, lending them out at full face value and use the profits to finance think tanks, focus groups that direct governments by deciding who runs and control the media. Politicians are just puppets. Kennedy was assasinated for wanting to print off debt free money. When presidents get assassinated its because they want to take control back or want to change the way banking is done.

To destroy a country you must divide its people and this war on terrorism has done that in many ways. Its given the government the excuse to expand police powers, install cameras and to build "detention centers"(concentration camps). Police are being turned against the populations through militarization.

The big USA corporations are involved in the sex trade and the slave trade. Its well known and well reported in mainstream media.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where we are going, especially since it is admitted. There are other quotes from Rockefeller, one where he admits to trying to destroy the USA from the inside to make way for global government.

The banks have affective control of all countries because they have been using the US army as their strong arm in overthrowing people oriented governments and putting corrupt dictators in and paying them off to let our banks take control of their currencies. All major countries now have concentration camps just like the USA and that is directly from someone very high up in the USA that answered my email directly regarding these camps.

Law professors have explained the parallels between our changes in laws and the changes in laws that occured during the NAZI occupation of Germany. Historians have connected the current US administration directly to NAZI's in personel, shown how NAZI's were financed by our corporations and how the NAZI philosophy & ideals has entered our schools, (Machiavellianism, Straussianism, Nihilism).

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

jbg:The "inside job" that I think happened was the decision, whether made directly or through inertia, not to follow up on the "chatter" among the terrorists that something "big" was about to happen.

That was all made up - there were no terrorist names on the original flight manifests and that was reported on mainstream. Many of the terrorists pictured in the FBI list have been found alive and thats been reported by many mainstream media outlets such as BBC and others. This has nothing to do with foreign terrorists.

The case for LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) is weak - practically non existent. The official story is rediculous. The only theory that holds water is MIHOP (made it happen on purpose) and it holds an awful lot of water and is practically bullet proof. There is mountains of evidence supporting MIHOP and its everywhere you look.

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

JBG:

Have you heard of this book "Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man" by John Perkins ? This explains how the governments are being used by the banks to take over foreign governments.

You must have heard of The Creature From Jekyll Island by Griffin. The premise of that book is 100% correct and its all backed up in history. Its aboput how the bankers took over in 1913 (Federal Reserve Act).

Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley is the book on 911 to read.

The truth movement is more than just about 911. Its a patriot movement to stop the destruction of the USA and the globalists from carrying out their plans. Its very consistent in its viewpoints and has piles of evidence to back up its viewpoints. The USA is being destroyed in every possible way, from medicare to the poisoning of foods and the water to having a police force turned against us.

If you want to know whats in store for you then investigate Katrina. Food aid was blocked, First aid was blocked and police were sent in to confiscate guns. It was a government experiment.

Its all comming up here and the American Union is how its happening.

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

There is *no evidence* pointing to Islamic terrorists pertetrating 911. The evidence that Popular Mechanics puts out wrt DNA being found is an outright lie. This is not sourced in PM.

Riverwind · January 9, 2007

I didn't say sulfur, FEMA didn't say sulfur. It was sulfidization which is a high temperature process.

Let's see: sulphur in the walls + 1000C fires = sulfidization. The existence of sulfidization is _inconclusive_ and it is impossible to know why it is there - even if it was there.

That paragraph you quote is not evidence. Its a low grade opinion based on nothing.

Funny, it makes more sense than any of the low grade opinions that you post. Anyone who looks at the videos of the WTC collapse can see that the collapse started where the planes hit the building. This alone makes a controlled demolition an extremely unlikely explanation because it implies that the people to set the demolition knew exactly where the plan were going to hit.

Which is impossible for two reasons (1) The buildings were designed to withstand multiple impacts like this. (2) A building collapsing into its own footprint straight down violates the laws of thermodynamics - which is why you need a CD team to make that happen in real life.

I have demonstrated that it is possible for a building to collapse into its own footprint. All you have demonstrated is that you really don't understand physics.

I noticed you completely avoided acknowledging your own incompetence:

If you push a cup of the end of a table it will rotate through the air as it hits the ground - No pivot point. Stop with your "scientific" analysis. Its really sounding ridiculous.
It should be obvious that the edge of the table is the pivot point. If you slowly push the cup off the table then there will be a period of time when the cup is partially off the table. If this period of time is long enough the cup will gain some rotational momentum as it pivots about the table edge and continue to rotate as it falls. If this period of time is too short then the cup will not rotate before it hits the ground.

Frankly, someone who cannot understand the forces that act on a cup getting pushed off a table has no business lecturing others on the physics of collapsing buildings.

Black Dog · January 9, 2007

So this looks nothing like a controlled demolition ? Why don't you provide a link to a controlled demolition that doesn't look like that.

You claimed the Twin Towers were brought down with controleld demolition. The Twin Towers' collapse looked nothing like a controlled demolition. As for WTC7, just because something looks like a controleld demolition, it does not neccesarily follow that it is a controlled demolition.

Canadian Blue · January 9, 2007

Law professors have explained the parallels between our changes in laws and the changes in laws that occured during the NAZI occupation of Germany. Historians have connected the current US administration directly to NAZI's in personel, shown how NAZI's were financed by our corporations and how the NAZI philosophy & ideals has entered our schools, (Machiavellianism, Straussianism, Nihilism).

Their hasn't been a link substantiated between Prescott Bush and the NAZI's, once again stop it with all the lies on here PN.

As well Strauss was an ORTHODOX JEW, so he couldn't have been a nazi.

The banks have affective control of all countries because they have been using the US army as their strong arm in overthrowing people oriented governments and putting corrupt dictators in and paying them off to let our banks take control of their currencies. All major countries now have concentration camps just like the USA and that is directly from someone very high up in the USA that answered my email directly regarding these camps.

Once again with the banks, compare this to what the NAZI's said about bankers.

Internationally, the Nazi Party believed that an international banking cabal was behind the global depression of the 1930s. Control of this cabal, which had grown to a position where it controlled both Europe and the United States, was identified with an elite and powerful group of Jews. However, a number of people believed that this was part of an ongoing plot by the Jewish people, as a whole, to achieve global domination. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which began its circulation in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, were said to have confirmed this, already showing "evidence" that the Bolshevik takeover in Russia was in accordance with one of the protocols. Broadly speaking, the existence of large international banking or merchant banking organizations was well known at this time. Many of these banking organizations were able to exert influence upon nation states by extension or withholding of credit. This influence is not limited to the small states that preceded the creation of the German Empire as a nation state in the 1870s, but is noted in most major histories of all European powers from the 16th century onward. Nevertheless, after the Great Depression, this libelous and unverified manuscript took on an important role in Nazi Germany, thus providing another link in the Nazis ideological motivation for the destruction of that group in the Holocaust.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where we are going, especially since it is admitted. There are other quotes from Rockefeller, one where he admits to trying to destroy the USA from the inside to make way for global government.

It actually only takes a paranoid mental patient to see that...

The army is being destroyed. The guys in Iraq are surrounded and sick from DU and from going from house to house pointing guns at people all the time while never knowing when they could be attacked. They are not comming back - they are there to be destroyed so that the country cannot revolt against the evil forces that are tearing it apart from within. The carriers in the Persian Gulf are sitting ducks. The Iranians can take them out anytime they want to with hypersonic missiles and fast torpedos.

This isn't Stalingrad son. As well I doubt the American Military is being completely destroyed, and I'm fairly confident the US would win in any conflict between them and Iran.

Gets crazier by the day.

That was all made up - there were no terrorist names on the original flight manifests and that was reported on mainstream. Many of the terrorists pictured in the FBI list have been found alive and thats been reported by many mainstream media outlets such as BBC and others. This has nothing to do with foreign terrorists.

Are you hallucinating again Poly?

If you want to know whats in store for you then investigate Katrina. Food aid was blocked, First aid was blocked and police were sent in to confiscate guns. It was a government experiment.

Say Poly, don't you have a government building to blowup or pipe bomb's to build?

Does anybody else think Polynewbie sound's like a Timothy McVeigh?

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

Riverwind:I have demonstrated that it is possible for a building to collapse into its own footprint. All you have demonstrated is that you really don't understand physics.

Why are you not going and discrediting the whole 911 truth movement with your physics. There is a lot more you could be doing than argueing here - you could be making idiots out of world class scientists ! You could put published professors who have directly stated that this is impossible to shame. (Just because your physics analysis is full of errors that I always point out should not discourage you)

Riverwind:Let's see: sulphur in the walls + 1000C fires = sulfidization. The existence of sulfidization is _inconclusive_ and it is impossible to know why it is there - even if it was there.

You are just making that up. Steven Jones abviously knew there was drywall in the buildings and still considers sulfidization a mystery if the official version is true.

Perhaps you can help Jones with his chemistry and his physics. He only has a Phd, you are a guy on the internet that is obviously a lot more knowledgeable than he is.

blackascoal · January 9, 2007

So this looks nothing like a controlled demolition ? Why don't you provide a link to a controlled demolition that doesn't look like that.

You claimed the Twin Towers were brought down with controleld demolition. The Twin Towers' collapse looked nothing like a controlled demolition. As for WTC7, just because something looks like a controleld demolition, it does not neccesarily follow that it is a controlled demolition.

I'm willing to bet that you didn't provide a link to a controlled demolition that doesn't look like what happened on 9/11 is because you cannot.

Am I close?

Additionally. I'm also willing to bet that you also cannot find any scientific law that supports these were collapses caused by anything other than a controlled demolition .. and the reason will be the very same .. you cannot.

Black Dog · January 9, 2007

Why are you not going and discrediting the whole 911 truth movement with your physics.

There's many otehrs doing just that.

There is a lot more you could be doing than argueing here - you could be making idiots out of world class scientists !

These so-called "world class scientists" seem to be doing a fine job of it themselves.

You could put published professors who have directly stated that this is impossible to shame.

You are correct: the 9-11 "truth" movement is impossible to shame.

(Just because your physics analysis is full of errors that I always point out should not discourage you)

If you can, why don't you?

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

Black Dog:These so-called "world class scientists" seem to be doing a fine job of it themselves.

Where ? Link ?

Canadian Blue · January 9, 2007

I'm willing to bet that you didn't provide a link to a controlled demolition that doesn't look like what happened on 9/11 is because you cannot.
Am I close?

Additionally. I'm also willing to bet that you also cannot find any scientific law that supports these were collapses caused by anything other than a controlled demolition .. and the reason will be the very same .. you cannot.

Polynewbie, you can't let your multiple personalites post on here. :lol:

blackascoal · January 9, 2007

Black Dog:These so-called "world class scientists" seem to be doing a fine job of it themselves.

Where ? Link ?

And don't forget the link to a controlled demolition that doesn't look exactly like 9/11.

PolyNewbie · January 9, 2007

Riverwind:It should be obvious that the edge of the table is the pivot point. If you slowly push the cup off the table then there will be a period of time when the cup is partially off the table. If this period of time is long enough the cup will gain some rotational momentum as it pivots about the table edge and continue to rotate as it falls. If this period of time is too short then the cup will not rotate before it hits the ground.

There is no "pivot point" the cup is moving just as the top part of the building would slider off the bottom remainder. It also keeps rotating through te air - where is the "pivot point" while it rotates through the air ?

Riverwind:If this period of time is too short then the cup will not rotate before it hits the ground

You are a fool with your "time too short" explanations. You only get a slow as opposed to fast rate of rotation with a shorter time period. You don't get "no rotation because the time is too short". Everything you say about physics cannot only be shown to be wrong - but stupid as well.

Riverwind · January 9, 2007

There is a lot more you could be doing than argueing here - you could be making idiots out of world class scientists !

World class? ROTFL, truthies are a bunch of quacks with zero credibility within the academic world. I don't need to discredit them.

Just because your physics analysis is full of errors that I always point out should not discourage you.

You have tried to point out errors have failed miserably. I know I have shredded your arguments when you have to restort to 'why don't you publish a paper' arguments. What you really mean to say is that you can't come up with a response to my arguments and you don't want to admit it.

Perhaps you can help Jones with his chemistry and his physics. He only has a Phd, you are a guy on the internet that is obviously a lot more knowledgeable than he is.

He is a PhD preaching a version of reality that no one else with any knowledge of the field believes. He was even fired from his job at BYU because of his views. Why should anyone care what this guy thinks.

Black Dog · January 9, 2007

And don't forget the link to a controlled demolition that doesn't look exactly like 9/11.

I grabbed

one at random. Though it intends to show the resemblance between the tower’s collapse and a controlled demolition, it succeeds in doing the opposite.

Most CDs start with the base of the building. The WTC towers fall starts at the top. In most CDs, the explosives' detonation precedes the collapse. In the WTC, the towers are falling before the "squibs" appear (which is inconsistent with CD, but consistent with the pancake theory). I can see how to the uninitated or the willfully ignorant, the WTC towers' fall would look like CD. But no one who stops for five seconds to think about it would believe that to be the case.

Canadian Blue · January 9, 2007

And don't forget the link to a controlled demolition that doesn't look exactly like 9/11.

http://www.implosionworld.com/wtc.htm

Perhap's you should listen to what the experts have to say instead.

I know that I can tell the difference between the WTC towers and a CD, but then again I don't believe that bankers are all of the world's problem's.

blackascoal · January 9, 2007

There is a lot more you could be doing than argueing here - you could be making idiots out of world class scientists !
World class? ROTFL, truthies are a bunch of quacks with zero credibility within the academic world. I don't need to discredit them.
Just because your physics analysis is full of errors that I always point out should not discourage you.
You have tried to point out errors have failed miserably. I know I have shredded your arguments when you have to restort to 'why don't you publish a paper' arguments. What you really mean to say is that you can't come up with a response to my arguments and you don't want to admit it.
Perhaps you can help Jones with his chemistry and his physics. He only has a Phd, you are a guy on the internet that is obviously a lot more knowledgeable than he is.
He is a PhD preaching a version of reality that no one else with any knowledge of the field believes. He was even fired from his job at BYU because of his views. Why should anyone care what this guy thinks.

There are MILLIONS of Americans who cares what Jones and Bowman and many others think who argue against the fairy-tale of 9/11. In fact, there are so many that MSM stopped doing polls on the subject because of the high number of those who disbelieve the fairy-tale.

Surely none here agruing for the fairy-tale are attempting to use .. "gasp" .. PHYSICS to support their childs bedtime story?