The Madrid Windsor Tower Fire - It burned for 20 hours and didn't collapse like the World Trade Center Towers did... (Israel, regime)

[Arus]

Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT

Well, duh - the Madrid Windsor Tower didn't have Mossad planting thermite on their floors either, did they?

http://www.bollyn.com/public/Israeli...on_to_9-11.pdf

Ugh, Bollyn. debunked and nothing but an anti-semtici rant

Israel had no connection 9/11. thanks for reminding us why truthers are nothing but racists.

[KRAMERCAT]

Originally Posted by Arus

Ugh, Bollyn. debunked and nothing but an anti-semtici rant

Israel had no connection 9/11. thanks for reminding us why truthers are nothing but racists.

Tell that to the dancing Israelis who later admitted to being there to 'document the event'. There were plenty of Americans Jews who died in the Trade Towers, but no Israelis. They knew what was about to go down. Most modern day Israelis have no connection to the original tribes of Israel or Judah.

[Arus]

Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT

Tell that to the dancing Israelis who later admitted to being there to 'document the event'.

You buy into every lie don't you?

Dancing Israelis - 911myths

Summary: There is no proof except for the second hand of a third hand report that didn't say anything about Isrealis' or dancing. It was a combination of different events that got mulled into one report.

[Arus]

There was no party there. WTC1 and WTC2 were closed over the weekend, with electrical service limited to elevator/maintenance only, telephone services interrupted, security cameras take off-line, and security guards with their bomb dogs removed. There are newspaper accounts before the closure and after.

Bull hockey pucks. There was a party that weekend before. The Windows of the World was open to the public and the Observation floor was still open to tourists.

There are tickets from visitors who were there, that were at the Windows of the World that weekend (supposedly during Scott Forbe's claim of a power down that weekend).





BTW, it took a force of 30 men to wire a 35 story building 6 weeks working weekends to wire it for demolition. Please provide us with the calculation to do that for 2 110 story buildings plus a 47 story one. And that 35 story building at that time in 2001 was the largest structure to be demolished through controlled demoltion.

Please provide us witnesses to this work. CD requires the gutting of support columns, and ripping out drywall and carpeting to get to the ponts to mount the explosives too.

Oh wait, you can't, because people work in those buildings 24/7. They would have onticed upturned desks and gaping holes in their walls and floors.

PBX tends to have an oily residue, which gets on your hands, clothes and shoes and then anything you touch (the walls, hand-railings in stairwells, elevator walls, elevator control buttons, carpet, tiling etc) leaves residue, and bomb dogs can detect that. Of course you wouldn't know that since you've never seen or worked with bomb dogs, or security dogs of any kind.

and neither have you, apparently since you don't even know how controlled demotionls are done (radio controlled and ignited explosives).

BTW, I've worked with those dogs as well. Yes they can detect it. There was a bomb sniffing dog on site that day. No detection by the dog on his part. No reaction by him during the rescue of several survivors by his partner Officer Lim of the NJ Port Authority.

His name was Sirius, and he was killed in the collapse of the North Tower

Actually they use "weasel words" throughout the report, because they really don't know. Had you been to arson school and were a qualified arson investigator (like I am even though I've actually investigated an arson), you be familiar with typical equations used.

It's apparent that you are not what you claim. I've spoken with real arson investigators and fire fighters (three of which moved from NYC after 9/11 who was part of the clean up and rescue efforts). NONE of them disagree with findings of the NIST report, but also admonished for the report to just state the issues of effects of Fire on unprotected steel too simply. Then they realized that the report was simply for the lay person to understand. Since the investigation wasn't about the fire, but the effects of having an airplane crash into a building that held its structure on the outside (not inside) they found the report to be accurate to that type of building. That fires (and its not suprise to them) can cause steel buildings to collapse. They don't disagree with those findings.

Any they say any firefighter worth his salt, who says otherwsie, should be immediately reported to their station commanders, for believing that steel could be safe in a fire that has raged for more than the rating of the fire proofing on the steel. That kind of thinking can put people, victims and fellow firefighters in danger.

You're wrong. Both Towers were built on a Central Core Design.

100% wrong. The twin towers were by design built to sustain the STRUCTURE of the buildings on the exterior. They wanted to maximize the amuont of rental space per floor, so the central area of the building was simply 47 major columns and the elevator shafts. There was no central core.

People dug themselves out of the elevators shafts after being stuck in the elevators, because hte WALLS were only drywall.

The towers were built with what is known as a framed tube design. Steel and Aluminum exterior, with a 4" concrete slabs (floors) held up by several steel trusses that ATTACHED to this exterior. Once the Exterior was compromised, the trusses could no longer hold the weight of each of the floors, and initiated collapse.

Did you even the READ the NIST reports? It's apparent you didn't. If you did, you wouldn't have claimed that the towers had a central core.

That is the only desgin permissible for buildings in excess of a certain height in accordance with standard building codes at the time the World Trade Center was built. The central core sustains the vertical load. Even FEMA admits that with its drawings.

False. As proven by WTC towers and the AON Center, you could build a skyscraper with the framed tube design and it could stand. it was actually better because it DEALT with the wind shere allowance alot better than a normal concrete core building.

Anyone who still uses the FEMA assessment report is purposefully ignoring the NIST report which CAME after Fema's after a MUCH longer investigation and research, and a peer reivew process that took nearly a year to finish. FEMA's report was a tertiary report to explain how ti could have happend, but it was nowhere near a comprehesnive and fully investigative report. But you ignore that FEMA pretty much concluded the SAME as NIST: that temperatures were hot enough to weakend the steel structure. Where they differed was that FEMA believed that some of the steel was corroded due to sulfidation (thereby thining the steel).

You, like FEMA, are attempting to falsely imply that the building was a Shell Design. It was not, and could not be, since building codes prohibited it.

False. You are falsely claiming that it was prohibited (but you don't even link to the law that would have prohibited the design). We have the statements by the DESIGNER and his company that designed the towers.

I'll take their claims, and their blueprints over your uneducated, unsupported claims any day

In Leslie Robertson's own words;

http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/20...robertson.html

The exo-skeleton was designed to support the lateral load, ie it was designed to allow the Towers to flex under wind shear or high winds (instead of toppling over) and the exo-skeleton design also allowed both Towers to withstand multiple impacts of Boeing 707s (since the Towers are in close proximity to 3 international airports and 5 regional airports and since planes had already struck several buildings in New York City, including the Empire State Building). Granted the Boeing 707 is smaller size, but it is of comparable equal mass to a Boeing 767.

Actually you are now misquoting Leslie Robertson, one of the engineers who worked on the Towers. He said that it could take the impact of a Boeing 707, traveling at approach speed (under 300 mph) as it was on its way to the airport nearby if lost in a fog.

Not multiple hits by planes.
Not by a nearly fully fueled plane going at 500 mph
Certainly not by a plane that is 20 percent bigger than a 707
And they didn't take into account the effect of the Fires that would follow

Again, in Leslie Robertson's own words (same link above):

The two towers were the first structures outside of the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airliner, the Boeing 707. It was assumed that the jetliner would be lost in the fog, seeking to land at JFK or at Newark. To the best of our knowledge, little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance. Indeed, at that time, no fireproofing systems were available to control the effects of such fires.

How is that possible? Gosh, I don't know, maybe because Boeing 707s are made of aluminum and steel, while Boeing 757s and Boeing 767s are made of aluminum, carbon-graphite composites and special polymers, like mylar.

So what? Did you know water can cut through steel or you can't believe something that is made of what your soda can is made out of, can cut through what was basically windows and steel frames?

Okay, then why was no criminal investigation undertaken?

You do know that the criminal INVESTIGATION has been going on for the better part of 10 years. Want to help it out? If you know how to link the funding straight to one particular person, then please call the FBI Tip line. They need a way to link the money that funded the terrorists, but all of their information lead to dummy accounts created by members of the Al Quaeda under assumed names. The funding came from many many many contributors, and they can't pin-point it to one or at least a few people. that donated the money or the people that withdrew it.

If you have the inforamtion please share it with the authorities. Otherwise, if you don't, who are you to say that no criminal investigation hasn't happened? or is not happening?

Probably because conducting a criminal investigation would result in the discovery of a conspiracy.

Only in your mind. It's ongoing, you just don't hear about it because we have better things to worry about now. Like our collapsing economy, the Right wing conservatives wanting to errode much of our freedoms, and that OBL is already dead.

LIE.

That is a lie, not a fact. Neither plane was fully loaded with jet fuel. Had you bothered to read the reports, both planes had an estimated 10,000 gallons and FEMA/NIST claimed that at least 3,000 gallons burned off during the impact.

BURNED off. You do know that burned off means that what they calculated ot have BURNED off. NOT what the plane carried at the time of impact.

If you bothered to read the reports without your rose-colored glasses, you would know the difference.

Upon impact, most of the fule (in both planes) exploded, but some of the fuel flooded the impact floors and caught fire. THAT's what burned off.

Don't tell someone is lying when they aren't. You are showing that you didn't read the report for comprehension.

Read and Weep:

Yet you ignored the part where FEMA pretty much concluded that it was hot enough to weaken the steel Structures.

LIE. Here is the truth (for those who can stomach it)

Not a lie. Steel needs to be fire proofed (sprayed with the fire protection which is RATED by hours - how long it can last in a fire) to allow for evacuation. Once the fire has exceeed its rating, the fire protection weakens and makes the steel suceptible to the heat. The Stele doesn't have to melt to give way. It only needs to reach more than half-way of its melting to point to lose 80% of its strength.

What is combustilbe in an office building that has floors the size of football fields?

Carpet,
Drapery
Computers
copiers
printers
tv monitors
chairs
pens
pencils
desks
wood paneling
fixtures
chemicals
humans
drywall

Its no secret to architect and engineers that the heat only need to reach a certain point in which the steel loses its stength if it is unprotected (25 minutes to lose 60 percent of its strength) - ask around NYC of the firefighters, they were surprised the towers didn't collapse much sooner:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1116122857.htm

Your equatiosn below prove nothing expect your gross ignorance on fires within enclosed spaces, that are left free to burn without any way of fighting them.

I am giving the government every benefit of the doubt, and I am assuming the fuel was concentrated.

But you didn't factor in ALL of the things that can burn in an office. Things that can ccause the heat and fire to get hotter and higher.

It has not been proven with any degree of certainty that heat caused damage to the steel beams. If you would take some time to peruse SFPE 500 and SFPE 1995 (those are standards published by the Society of Fire Prevention Engineers before 9-11) you would know that JP5 does not produce enough heat to soften steel, or for that matter, affect steel in any way, unless someone was pumping pure oxygen into towers.

Combine that fuel with OTHER items that can burn in a office building, yes, HEAT (which is what NIST found to be the culprit) can cause steel to lose its strength.

Since no one was pumping oxygen or using stoichemical catalysts in the fire, the JP5 (and this applies to all kerosene based jet fuels) could not have burned at a temperature greater than about 800° C (about 1500° F).

so those big holes that the planes created didn't feed oxygen to the fires?

Steel begins to soften at about 1370° C (about 2500° F).

Not soften, WEAKEN (there is a difference). Try 1000° C
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1116122857.htm

That's twice I've embarrassed you.

you've embarassed no one but yourself.

First I caught you in a lie about the WTC towers construction
Then you lied about what Leslie Roberston stated.

Nice that you can embarass yourself so easily

LIE.

The truth is that a unloaded Boeing 767 weighs 181,610 pounds. Google it. A frame by frame analysis shows the aircraft moving at approximately 430 to 440 knots at time of impact. I did not do the analysis. It's based on frame rate per second (v = d * t)

Yes, speed can be determined by video alone. Let's forget that there are other, more accurate ways to determine speed.

I find your credibility to be on a par with Herr Josef Göbbels.

Sorry that we use facts where you use nothing but what you came up with out of the ether.

LIE. This is a standard fire curve used by the SFPE and others (including NIST). Odd they did not include one in any of their reports. Also odd that they did not make any attempt to calculate BTUs or burn time.

Not within their scope. They didn't need to determine the burn time. They actually was surprised the WTC towers didn't collapse sooner.

A Standard Fire Curve says that a steel beam must be subjected to temperatures for at least 90 minutes to result in 1 mm of deflection. Note that 1 mm of deflection is not catastrophic. Neither is 2 mm. Structures are deemed unsafe at 6 mm of deflection, but not on the brink of collapse.

Did you calculate the load on those steel trusses? Did you calculate the initial impact damage as well? Did you calculate the total area of the fire's effect on the trusses?

You only concentrate on a scale that focuses on a FOCAL point of heat. The fire within buildings were SPREAD over several FLOORS as well as entire floors.

Combined with all that you missed, that 90 minutes can be shortened to less than 20 minutes, in the right conditions.

Again, firefighters and even the engineers on scene were surprised the towers stood as long as they did.

That graphic is in the SPFE handbook.

yes, its a reference image. To be used to help guage time for those who work in Fire safety. IT isn't the bible and its more a guide than a "this is how it is, no deviation".

Sorry, but the world don't work that way. Different things can effect the conditions of the fire.

<<snipped quotes from firefighters who were on the lower floors, not the floors right below and above the impacts .. They were not on those floors and COULD not get to them>>>

Clearly the fires were not as bad as you claim they were. Worse than that, the damage to the central core you claim exists does not exist.

Based on reports from firefighters who were using the stairwells to get to the top floors. Unless they had Xray vision, they were no where near the impact floors, and could not assess what was happening.

Floor 81 in WTc 1 was completely engulfed. NONE of the firefighters could get above 79 to asses the damage

That would be an incorrect conclusion, but then you don't know what you're talking about.

That is the correct conclusion BASED on all available evidence of the day. But then again, you're just pulling things out of the ether.

Explosives are not "wired." Your knowledge of explosives in on a par with a #2 Lead Pencil.

Contolled Demotlions, the EXPlosives are WIREd. That's why the "wire" is called DETACORD (or detonating cord)

Having particpated in three Controlled Demolitions for a school report nearly 17 years ago, I spoke with several Demolition companies who use explosives (and news for you, Explosive controlled demoltions are RARELY done; most demoltions are done by simply using Bulldozers and other monster construction machines. It's cheaper and its much safer to do), and they do not use anything but detonation cords to wire up their explosives. It took them 8 weeks to wire up a 15 story building where I lived, and nearly 40 workers to do so.

here is the project I had access to I was doing my project:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph7HzxcLEkI

They showed me the detacord as they installed them within the pillars holding the building up.

Also, notice what is in that video that is missing from the 1000's of videos on the collapse of the WTc towers?

Blasting caps are electronic devices. Basically they're a cell-phone/pager.

NO they are not. Blasting caps are just sma,ll explosives that sets off the bigger explosive. They are either electronic, non-electronic, or fuses. Electric caps are set of by a dynamo, which generates an electric charge by a LONG WIRE, to set off the small explosive charge. It's to ensure safety (more for the person INSTALLING the explosive)

Again, you show that you don't know WTF you are talking about.

You call it, it detonates. Proprietary software is used.

Wrong. Blasting Caps are explosives. You do not "call" it. It has no software built into it. All it does is transfer a charge from small explosive to the larger one that it's attached to.

you show that you don't know WTF you are talking about.

I simply enter the code for each blasting cap, and I do that using a bar code scanner. I just scan the bar code on the blasting cap and the type in it's location. I can set up dozens, even hundreds of pre-programmed blasting sequences, and the select the pre-programmed sequence I want based on the scenario.

Now you are just making crap up.

I can even edit the sequence on the fly.

you really are making crap up.

All I need is spotters on the rooftops with video cameras and handheld radios, and guess what, look at the videos, look at the photos, read the eye-witness accounts, and there were people on the roof-tops with video cameras and handheld radios. I get a live video feed, my team assesses the damage, we choose a firing sequence, call it up, and the hit execute. A transmitter sends out a micro-burst transmission and detonates each blasting cap in the proper sequence. That's how it works.

Yeah you're really making crap up.

You might want to try using real facts next time.

you mght want to stop watching movies, since it seems that's where you got most of your information about demolitions.

By rogue elements in select government agencies.

Name them.

Learn and understand the difference between individuals acting on their own without authority, and a government directing their actions.

yet you can't believe that 20 hijackers could plan far ahead (almost a year) to hijack a plane all funded by a terrorist organization.

I know it will be difficult for you, but if you try really, really hard and perhaps have lots of tutoring you just might be able to grasp the not so subtle difference.

It's not difficutl for us to know that you haven't told a correct thing in this thread, except getting soem facts about fire correct, but your use of it has nothing to do with the situations that happend on 9/11

No, it doesn't.

]


correction. You got it correct that steel doesn't melt at 1300 degrees.

Still most of your post are nothing more than your delusions and gross ignorance.

None of the materials in either Tower could have produced the temperatures necessary to affect steel.

apparently, you've never talked to firefighters.

A normal house fire can reach up to temperatures of 1200 degrees C (commonly 1100). sTeel only needs to be subjected to 1000 degree fire for 25 minutes before it loses 60 percent of its strength.


And NIST disagrees with you (I'll take their word over yours):

Based on its comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large number of jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius, or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York City Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

Also, Under certain specific conditions (none of which were present in either tower) a fire can reach temperatures of 1260° C (2300° F) but it takes 8 hours to do so.

Nope it doesn't and you don't need certan specific conditions.
Plane impact, fuel started fires (already creating a heat index of over 1000 degrees C), burnign the rest of the contents within the towers, and lots of oxygen fed to these fires.

It got hot enough, and tests prove that 25 minutes was all that is needed to have lose 60% of its strength.


Again, I'll take NISTS reports and findings overy your uneducated guesses.

I challenge you to read ASTM E 119 for the bad news, if you have the guts.

I challenge you to read the NIST reports. It's apparent you didn't.

I already exposed those as lies.

no you didn't, You added on your own made up ones.

Surely you can do something other than repeat lies.

Said the pot to the kettle.

I'm quoting the FEMA report and I cited book, verse and chapter. What are you citing, other than your own fantasies?

You're relying on a report that only did a performance look at the buildings. They did the preliminary findings and offered some explanations, that weren't thoroughly looked into. That's why NIST was tasked with providing a much more detailed explanation, and then provide recommendations for furhter projects to PREVENT this kind of disaster from happening againt (the best pull away from this? do not design skycrapers using a framed tube design).

FEMA and NIST did come to the same conclusion: That fires got hot enough to affect the steel's strength. Where they differed was if the Steel trusses themsevles were corroded or thin due to age and sulfidation (RUST), and helped to contribute to the total collapse model.

You have no evidence to support that, and neither does FEMA or NIST. They were not allowed to examine evidence on-site, and clearly state so in their report. Some did go to dump where debris was being hauled, but they did only a cursory investigation, and they were unable to determine where those steel beams where in the Towers.

You do realize that the site was considered a RESCUE area rather than a crime scene.

The debris were hauled off to Fresh Kills and a Hangar at JFK. Those debris ARE STILL there today. NIST and FEMA had access to those debris, freely.


Cursory investigation? I guess handlin and looking at the debrirs, along with testing them is jsut "cursory" to you.

Here, were considered it a thorough examination.

NIST also modeled the collapse based on their intial findings on the debris.

The fact that fire-fighters were using internal hoses and water clearly contradicts any claims that central core was catastrophically damaged, as does the fact that people were using the elevators until power was interrupted, and the fact that people were using the stairwells in the central core.

The central core (you mean the elvator shafts because that's what hte center of the building was. ELEVATOR shafts) was damaged above floors 81 in each building (no firefighter got that high)

There were no internal hoses that they used. Their first and foremost job was to get people out (you do know that rescue efforts are teh first thing firefighters do, if the building is not engulfed fully). Once they coudl do that they, would head up to fight the fires.

They simply ran out of time.

Review the 911 telephone call from Kevin Cosgrove. He clearly and repeatedly states the issue is neither fire nor heat, it is smoke.

He wasn't on the impact floors and not on the floors that were on fire. He WAS WELL above the impact floors (the plane hit the South Tower at floors 77 and 85 ) He was 20 floors above the impact point (over 100 feet above). He wouldn't have been affected by the fires as there was 20 floors between him and the affected floors. HE would have definitely got the brunt of the smoke from those fires.

He repeatedly states he has trouble breathing and that he cannot see. That is a low temperature fire starved of fuel.

Yes 100 feet between you and the fires below, you definitely wouldn't feel the heat of them.

He was nowhere near the fires; he was 100 feet above them on the 105th FLOOR.

Yes, and physics says it should have continued to topple over to the ground below, leaving the Tower standing.

No it wouldn't, that would defy physics. Please make a house of cards like a grid pattern, 10 levels high and just as wide. Now take a ball and throw it at it. Please tell us what happens. Did the house of cards follow the path of the ball, or did they fall straight down?


To have something "Topple" over, a force GREATER than GRAVITY, would have to ENACT a force on the outside to continue to momenutm. That force would have to be bigger than 1/3rd the size of the buildings and traveling A LOT faster than thoses planes did, and exert enough FORCE that would be larger than those planes exerted.

What FEMA/NIST are saying is that the 10th Floor could support the entire mass of the 100 floors above it, but couldn't support 50 floors, which is absurd.

Only to ignorant people such as yourself.

For those of you who believe there was no conspiracy, I'm still waiting for your explanation as to why:

1] the date to bid out the WTC was moved up from 2004 to 1999.

You can't even get facts straight. Sivlerstein already owned WTC 7, as he built it in the 80's. He wanted to have the WTC complex in total, so when the NJ Port Authority put it up for lease auction in 2000, he placed his bid. A nother bid fell through, and teh NJ PA took his bid, and signed a leas with him in July of 2001

The bid date didn't change (and certainly not from 1999). The NJ PA already had a leaser insterested before LArry Silverstein put in his bid, but that bidder fell through. When they got no other bids (for almost a year), the NJ accepted Silversteisn offer.

2] the winning bidder of the WTC Lease Contract reneged and backed out of the bid (which allowed Silverstein to be declared the runner up in April).

NO, the bid fell through. That happens. Lease holders get cold feet, think its not a good investment, And the WTC complex was not without its own Terrorist tarted history (WTC 1 was bombed in 1993). Also the requirement by the NJPA to carry some type of insurance for the buildings to cover them incase of aNOTHER terrorist attack may have soured the original bidder.

3] FBI Agent Maltbie stood down all investigations that might have uncovered activity leading to the discovery of the 9-11 Plan.

No, he didn't. He prevented the search of Zacarius Mossaoui to prevent him from flying. That he ignored requests to do so. That didn't stop agents from examining other suspects that Mossaoui ran around with.

If you want to find out why, talk to him. The FBI is at fbi.gov

No one is stopping you.

4] the Milwaukee SAC refused to approve applications for search warrants to search Moussaui's laptop computer while he was in custody on orders from superiors.

There is thing called reasonable cause. You have to have a reasonable suspicion or cuase to get a warrant accepted to search someone's private property. One can't simply get a warratn to search a computer if there is no tangible proof that it was used in the commission of a crime.

Did someone witness Mossoaui typing up his plans on the computer? Did someone see emails sent by Mossaoui?

If not, please tell us how the government/SAC can violate someone's privacy without probable cause to search?

5] a review and alteration of aircraft intercept procedures over US air space was initiated in 1999.

Actually, it started long before 1999. As the cold war wound down, the need to have aircarft to patrol our airspace dwindled.

so before 1999, we were down to 7 total aircraf to patrol our nation's skies.

6] the US took into custody five Israeli nationals.

and they were released. No charges filed.

So what?

7] all 5 Israeli nationals were former IDF members.
8] 3 of the 5 Israeli nationals were Mossad agents.
9] 5 Israeli nationals entered the US illegally.
10] the 3 Mossad agents were held in solitary confinement for 71 days.
11] documents relating to their interrogation have not been released
12] 5 Israeli nationals were observed by dozens of witnesses celebrating the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 and that they were dancing, hollering and "High-Fiving."
13] 5 Israeli national were situated in the parking lot of an apartment complex in New Jersey in plain view of the WTC standing atop a step van bearing the Urban Moving Systems logo with a video camera mounted on a tripod no later than 8:35 AM on 9-11.

14] prior knowledge of a crime by two or more persons is prima facie evidence of conspiracy.
15] more than 100 Israeli nationals were employed at Urban Moving Systems Weehauken, New Jersey.

16] when FBI agents returned to the premises of Urban Moving Systems with a search warrant, all Israeli nationals had fled the US.

17] all 100+ Israeli national had entered the US illegally.

Take care of all of this, which is just a block of racist nonsense;



Again, its a combination of several second hand reports (and none of them stated that they were former IDF members). None of them mentioned that they were MOssad agents (only truther sites and anti-semitc sites made mention of this).

And none of them were here illegally.

The investigation of these indiviudals were made public in 2004, because the five that were arrested worked for a moving company. They later sued the DOJ. No news on the outcome of the case.

Of course you have proof that "they were all here illegallY" Of course you dont. Its just another copy pasta from a truther site, that is severely outdated



Oh the reports that you say don't exist?
http://911myths.com/images/3/31/4617...ice-Report.pdf


http://911myths.com/images/9/97/6239...n-2-944876.pdf
http://911myths.com/images/a/a5/6239...n-3-944880.pdf
http://911myths.com/images/2/29/6239...n-4-944881.pdf
http://911myths.com/images/2/24/6282...n-5-944891.pdf

18] the full content of all radar and audio tapes from civilian and military air traffic controllers is still classified and that portions have not been released.

All recordings from that day, have been released. Why should the thousands of airports that were not effected hand over recordings that had nothing to do with the hijackings?

The recordings from all the airports, NEADS and the FAA have been released, and were part of the Mossaoui Trial

Sorry, if you don't know how to read evidence.

19] the identities of the pilots from the 1st Fighter Squadron at Langley Air Force Base (Hampton, Virgina) have not been released.

They didn't come from Langley. They came from Andrews Air Force Base. And we know both their names:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...ODK_story.html

20] Donald Rumsfeld stated that Flight 93 had been shot down.

Based on an unconfirmed report as they news came in, because they knew that Flight 93 had crashed, and two fighter jets were tasked with finding it.

As we saw in the link above, they weren't even equipped with anything that could have shot down the plane if they wanted to. They were ready to ram the plane to stop it.


I'll take the reports from the actual pilots over the 2nd hand unconfirmed report that Rumsfield received.


There were many unconfirmed reports that day. At first they said that it was 10 planes; we know that it was only 4.

21] the government violated federal laws and regulations by not reconstructing the aircraft for Flights 93 or 77.

FALSE. Absolutely 100% false. There is no law that requires the planes to be rebuilt. Otherwise 90% of all the Aircraft accidents that have happened are in violation of this FAKE law you made up.

The only time a plane is reconstructed/ is when the crash reason is not known (to see what CAUSED teh crash)

EVERYONE knew on 9/11 what caused the crashes of those planes. There was no requirement to reconstruct them.

22] a NORAD exercise based on a scenario of planes flying into the World Trade Center had been scheduled for 9-11.

Wrong again. It wasn't about flying into the WTC towers;

And it was an exercise that covered several scenarios over several days:

On Sep 6, the scenario concerned a military C-130 that was behaving strangely. On Sep 7, the scenario was a defecting Aeroflot plane. On Sep 8, NEADS exercised counter narcotics procedures dealing with a split track out of Bermuda headed for Philadelphia.


A more extensive look at "Vigilant Guardian" exercises can be found here.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=70300

23] a FEMA command exercise in New York City had been scheduled for 9-11.

A routinely held exercise that happens in nearly various coastal city in the US. FEMA conducts these exercises every month (nearly) for prepeation in the case of an emergency. LA had just gone through theirs, prior to FEMA's exercise in September.

24] no criminal investigation was ever undertaken into the events of 9-11.

Wrong. The criminal investigation remains ongoing to this dayl.

25] thousands of active and retired law enforcement officers (like myself) continue to demand an investigation (obviously police are left-wing tofu eating liberal commies).

yes argument by populum.

You can demand all you want. Not our fault that you don't like the answers that have already been provided.

Wnat your own investigation? Then you raise the money, hire your own ivnestigators and do your own investigation. Don't ACCUSE the governemtn of complicity and then DEMAN in the same breat they fund your invetigation based on the comments of crackpots.

26] hundreds of New York City fire-fighters do not believe the government's version (obviously they are ultra-left-wing tofu sushi eating liberal commies).

I know several firefighters that find the NIST version to be accurate. Not our fault that some firefighters are misguided by the lies that you repeat.

I guess I'll kill another thread issuing a challenge. Too bad, so sad. Go on, everyone run away and stick your head in the sand.

Your "challenge" (kind not even, since you made up everything you posted), has been met, and shown for the faux information that you posted as fact.

Too bad.. so sad. Its nice when you are shown to be nothing more than a shill for the 9/11 truthers, who dont mind making moeny off of gullible shuckters like yourself.



Spent 2 hours on this BS as its nothing more than repeated nonsense going on 5 years.


911 truth - nothing but a broken record for the last five years.

[Mightyqueen801]

"There was no party there. WTC1 and WTC2 were closed over the weekend, with electrical service limited to elevator/maintenance only, telephone services interrupted, security cameras take off-line, and security guards with their bomb dogs removed. There are newspaper accounts before the closure and after."

Posted banking on the hope that no one who worked at the WTC or was familiar with its operations would ever read it...and know that this is a load of bs. The funniest part of the bolded is that you are attempting to claim that NYC's tallest buildings, the view from the homes of everyone on the Jersey Hudson coast, Brooklyn and Staten Island waterfronts, and visible from 30, 40, and even 50 miles away to tens of millions of people, was DARK all weekend--and no one ever noticed this or remarked on it. LMAO.

"1] the date to bid out the WTC was moved up from 2004 to 1999."

I've asked you twice before to provide evidence of this tale, but you don't seem to have been able to produce it.

"2] the winning bidder of the WTC Lease Contract reneged and backed out of the bid (which allowed Silverstein to be declared the runner up in April)."

The "runner-up"? LOL, what is this, the Miss America contest? Yeah, you know something about public contracting, NOT. Vornado and the PA could not come to terms and so they entered into negotiations with SPI. And this is suspicious because...? Oh I know. You're now going to pretend that Silverstein somehow made a profit off the loss of the buildings, thereby providing a cute little motive. Don't bother. Anyone remotely familiar with the financing of the WTC rebuild knows how stupid that statement is.

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT

Tell that to the dancing Israelis who later admitted to being there to 'document the event'. There were plenty of Americans Jews who died in the Trade Towers, but no Israelis. They knew what was about to go down. Most modern day Israelis have no connection to the original tribes of Israel or Judah.

that was debunked...you have been had by the twoofers

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by Mircea

There was no party there. WTC1 and WTC2 were closed over the weekend, with electrical service limited to elevator/maintenance only, telephone services interrupted, security cameras take off-line, and security guards with their bomb dogs removed. There are newspaper accounts before the closure and after.

PBX tends to have an oily residue, which gets on your hands, clothes and shoes and then anything you touch (the walls, hand-railings in stairwells, elevator walls, elevator control buttons, carpet, tiling etc) leaves residue, and bomb dogs can detect that. Of course you wouldn't know that since you've never seen or worked with bomb dogs, or security dogs of any kind.



.

oh please

the wtc was not closed

saturday the 8th...there was a wine tasting party at WoW...I was there

there was a CONCERT in the plaza below the towers.. people would have noticed if half the towers were blacked out((( there was a public free outdoor festival at 7:00 pm on 9/8/2001 in the World Trade Center Plaza between the two buildings (New York Times, September 7, 2001, E-3), featuring the Twyla Tharp dance troupe. So if there was a power down and massive preparation for building demolition, it would've been in the midst of this public event.)))



the observation deck was open

there was NO POWER DOWN....

and the dogs were there...Sirus (a bomb sniffing dog) DIED on 9/11


so to re-evaluate

no it was not closed

that building was open 24/7 to WORLD WIDE financial companies

I was at a wine tasting party on the Saturday night before 9/11 at WoW..till midnight

do you understand how big the wtc complex was

do you understand it had 50,000 workers at all times of the day..it was open 24/7/365

you understand the 'powerdown' thing has been debunked many, many times (there was a wine tasting at WoW( I attended that), there was a concert in the plaza, and the observation deck was open)...there never was a power down and the security which was by the PANYNJ was always on to include the bomb sniffing dogs (Sirus was a bomb sniffing dog that DIED in the attack)



uhm

forbes was debunked years ago..it was a NETWORK power down on HIS floor

1. one weekend wouldnt be enough to wire 1 floor let alone 267 floors

2. Wow was open during this alledge power down

3. the observation deck was open too

4. there was a CONCERT in the plaza below the towers.. poeple would have noticed if half the towers were blacked out((( there was a public free outdoor festival at 7:00 pm on 9/8/2001 in the World Trade Center Plaza between the two buildings (New York Times, September 7, 2001, E-3), featuring the Twyla Tharp dance troupe. So if there was a power down and massive preparation for building demolition, it would've been in the midst of this public event.)))

5 the company forbes allegedly worked for..doesnt even know who he is....hmmm

6. and yet only ONE PERSON ..forbes..has said of this alledged powerdown...hmmm

7. and the biggie..a power down would mean NOTHING...at least from a demo side



Fact: Nobody else from Fiduciary Trust has said anything about it over the last six years (until now where some random man on the street chimes in). Nobody from floor 50 on up has said anything about it either.

Fact: Scott Forbes has backed down from his initial claim of the power being off from floor 50 on up. He has admitted that all he knows is that his floor (floor 97) had the network power off for some reason.

Fact: Cabling upgrades for high speed data doesn't require a 26 hour "Power down". At best you might see the power out for a few minutes in some very localized areas.

Fact: Security systems have battery backups so the loss of power wouldn't compromise it at all.

Fact: These all came from a "Truther" web site, not a debunker one. The story is so bad that even other truthers call you an idiot for taking it at face value as "Proof" of an inside jorb.



no only would it take a large crew, and months:

but it would also require lots and lots of explosives, wire

btw expolsive detonators (including hardwired ones) dont like radio freqs..that's why you have to turn radios and walkietalkies off when you enter a demo site

not to mention the fat that they would have to open up every wall to get to the beams andcut a v-notch in the beams(would make for an unstable building (especially a building that is 100 stories tall))

not to mention the bomb sniffing dogs that were on duty

not to mention that explosives dont like fire, or being shook (a plane crashing)


how anyone could even think that a complex that had 50,000 people working in it,, with millions of visitors EVERYDAY. 24/7 could be demo'd...they are just nuts

[Eeyore1954]

Originally Posted by HC475

The Windsor Tower in Madrid Spain - YouTube

The Windsor Tower was engulfed in flames and burned for 20 hours, but did not collapse. Both World Trade Centre towers collapsed within 90 minutes of being hit and engulfed in flames...

World Trade Center 7 was not hit by a plane and still collapsed...

I am sure this has been mentioned numerous times in the thread but the Windsor Tower was not hit by a large airplane traveling at a high speed.

[Frank_Carbonni]

Originally Posted by Visvaldis

Come on, everybody knows that the government always tells the truth, especially about all the events on 9-11.
The government already made an investigation and determined that fires from jet fuel caused the buildings to buckle because everything in the buildings melted. Why do people still question the government version?
We should all raise our right hands and say; I believe everything the government tells me.

Aren't you the same guy (or gal) who is always mocking conservatives and libertarians for distrusting the government's role in the economy? But now you believe that the same government would kill up to 3,000 of its own people in the country's largest city, cause several billion dollars worth of damage to public and private infrastructure, cause one of the largest drops in the stock market in the immediate aftermath, lie about how the buildings collapsed, and then frame the son of Saudi businessman (which could cause rifts with an ally) to start two wars?

Yet, it's crazy it distrust that same government in other matters? I just want to make sure, but like you always do, you'll either ignore my question or avoid committing to anything outright.

[Omniscient1]

Originally Posted by HC475

The Windsor Tower was engulfed in flames and burned for 20 hours, but did not collapse. Both World Trade Centre towers collapsed within 90 minutes of being hit and engulfed in flames...

World Trade Center 7 was not hit by a plane and still collapsed...

So the Windsor Tower is still a Fix-er-upper? Is that your point?