9/11 Documentary

[finster]

This is probably my favorite 9/11 documentary:
https://youtu.be/YsRm8M-qOjQ
It makes some great arguments and some that aren't so great. I would have to watch it again to remember all the arguments but here are a few:

1. Operation Northwoods
This was a plan drawn up by the US military to blow up a ship near Cuba and included hijacking of planes to do so. This would be blamed on Cuba and was meant to justify a war with them to the American people. Sound similar to anything else?
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662

2. World Trade Center 7
If you have never heard of this building don't be surprised because most haven't and neither had I until a waguns member alerted me to this information. This building completely collapsed just like the twin towers yet the two buildings which are closer to the towers didn't seer close to the same amount of damage.

FEMA_5-26_1.jpg

3. The speed at which the towers fell including wtc 7. The towers fell at almost free fall speed which is impossible to do if there anything like 40+ stories of a steel building obstructing the fall.

4. The engines found in the debris do not match the planes which were supposedly flown into the towers.

5. The complete lack of any air support after the first plane hit. There are many air force bases within close proximity to NYC yet they weren't available that day since they were taken out of the area for a training exercise.

6. Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams.

Please discuss and feel free to voice skepticism backed by logical arguments as regards the claims of this film. No I won't put this in the "tin foil hat thread" as that language paints everyone who believes these things to be crazy or not normal.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

[TechnoWeenie]

Steel stretches when heated, and loses its strength.

A 100ft beam heated to 1000* will stretch 9 1/2", the add'l load and stressing of attached components will lead to a failure..

That same beam heated to 1500* will sag and twist....

One of the first things I learned in my Fire Protection Engineering classes...


A house fire can flashover at 950-1100*, with temps exceeding 2000*, and that's without an abundance of accelerants..

Toss in a couple thousand pounds of JET A-1, and winds ripping through the urban canyon to fuel the fire.... and I don't see it out of the question at all...

Last edited by TechnoWeenie on Sun Apr 26, 2015 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[olydemon]

I always knew 9/11 was perpetrated by verizon and the usps.

[kf7mjf]

Steel stretches when heated, and loses its strength.

A 100ft beam heated to 1000* will stretch 9 1/2", the add'l load and stressing of attached components will lead to a failure..

That same beam heated to 1500* will sag and twist....

One of the first things I learned in my Fire Protection Engineering classes...


A house fire can flashover at 950-1100*, with temps exceeding 2000*, and that's without an abundance of accelerants..

Toss in a couple thousand pounds of JET A-1, and winds ripping through the urban canyon to fuel the fire.... and I don't see it out of the question at all...

So you are saying a blast furnace like effect can melt steel beams?

[Mediumrarechicken]

Steel stretches when heated, and loses its strength.

A 100ft beam heated to 1000* will stretch 9 1/2", the add'l load and stressing of attached components will lead to a failure..

That same beam heated to 1500* will sag and twist....

One of the first things I learned in my Fire Protection Engineering classes...


A house fire can flashover at 950-1100*, with temps exceeding 2000*, and that's without an abundance of accelerants..

Toss in a couple thousand pounds of JET A-1, and winds ripping through the urban canyon to fuel the fire.... and I don't see it out of the question at all...

So you are saying a blast furnace like effect can melt steel beams?

Boy I'd sure say so myself. Although I've never blown on a fire or anything.

[kf7mjf]

Steel stretches when heated, and loses its strength.

A 100ft beam heated to 1000* will stretch 9 1/2", the add'l load and stressing of attached components will lead to a failure..

That same beam heated to 1500* will sag and twist....

One of the first things I learned in my Fire Protection Engineering classes...


A house fire can flashover at 950-1100*, with temps exceeding 2000*, and that's without an abundance of accelerants..

Toss in a couple thousand pounds of JET A-1, and winds ripping through the urban canyon to fuel the fire.... and I don't see it out of the question at all...

So you are saying a blast furnace like effect can melt steel beams?

Boy I'd sure say so myself. Although I've never blown on a fire or anything.

I've seen steel melted with coal.

[H2obouget]

Jet fuel burn in an open air fire under 2000 f (closer to 1800f)
Steel melts in +2200 temps

Jet fuel is extremely volitile. In an open fire it would burn off in a matter of minutes.
North tower burned for 102 minutes.

Using the theory that the jet fuel some how managed to melt the structure, which as I listed above...is not physically possible, explain how the entire building managed to fall almost straight down on its self.
If the fire greatly weakened none side of the build the weight of the building above should have caused the top to tip and start falling at an angle. That fall would then be subject to physics and the building top would land away from the base of the parent building.

"The top fell straight down crushing the supports below."
Bullshit...anyone who believes that hasn't taken a physics class.
The static structure of the lower building would have acted as an ablative break to the top. The steel below might have yielded initially, but each floor lower would have increases the resistance pushing back.
What should have happened at that point, is that one area of the resistant lower building should have given way while the rest of the building pushed back at the falling object...deflection. Deflection would have resulted in the top falling sideways...see above.

The odds of that building...much less BOTH of them falling, straight down...are practically nil.
In fact if you go back and watch the north tower drop...you seebthaat the top tries to deflect...but the deflection resistance is immediately removed so while the top is now side ways it never has a chance to topple.
There is only one way this occurs.

A controlled demolition.
There were reports of workers working in the structure of the building for about 2 months prior to the drop. No one remembers who they worked for.

People always forget about building 4...that housed the world bank
..there was an estimated 200 Million dollars in gold and silver in their vault. It never been recovered.
Several years later there is a huge rush on gold and the price goes through the roof.

Why did 9/11 happen...

2000 gold was worth $270 an ounce
Say 135M of the banks bullion was gold...that's 500K ounces
Gold peeked at just over $1800
X 500K ounces= 900M in gold. (And the numbers I chose are probably lower than actual in regards to the ounces on hand)

So why 9/11...765 Million Dollars is a pretty good start.
Not to mention the government contracts, for war supplies, reconstruction, and such things.

Who?
I don't know but Haliberton would certainly have the money to back it, the manpower to pull it off, and the skills to do it behind everyones back.

It just so happens that the North woods planning was originally written up by Cheney and Rumsfeld some 30+ years prior.

[kf7mjf]

The gold and silver was never what? http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/01/nyreg ... -gold.html

Skyscrapers are designed to collapse downward too...

[TechnoWeenie]

Jet fuel burn in an open air fire under 2000 f (closer to 1800f)
Steel melts in +2200 temps

Jet fuel is extremely volitile. In an open fire it would burn off in a matter of minutes.
North tower burned for 102 minutes.

accelerants accelerate the burning process, hence the name.

One of the calculations used in determining the size of a fire, is factoring in fuel source. In the case of an office building...Papers.. plastics...carpets.. virtually everything becomes a fuel source.

Factoring in the high winds, then multiple flashovers which must have occurred, temps that high were almost inevitable.. Again, this is all fire science 101. I'm not even getting into metallurgy and shit because that's not my specialty.

The steel wouldn't have to melt, merely weaken structurally and fail, causing a cascade failure as it went down.

Using the theory that the jet fuel some how managed to melt the structure, which as I listed above...is not physically possible, explain how the entire building managed to fall almost straight down on its self.
If the fire greatly weakened none side of the build the weight of the building above should have caused the top to tip and start falling at an angle. That fall would then be subject to physics and the building top would land away from the base of the parent building.

"The top fell straight down crushing the supports below."
Bullshit...anyone who believes that hasn't taken a physics class.
The static structure of the lower building would have acted as an ablative break to the top. The steel below might have yielded initially, but each floor lower would have increases the resistance pushing back.
What should have happened at that point, is that one area of the resistant lower building should have given way while the rest of the building pushed back at the falling object...deflection. Deflection would have resulted in the top falling sideways...see above.

The odds of that building...much less BOTH of them falling, straight down...are practically nil.
In fact if you go back and watch the north tower drop...you seebthaat the top tries to deflect...but the deflection resistance is immediately removed so while the top is now side ways it never has a chance to topple.
There is only one way this occurs.

A controlled demolition.
There were reports of workers working in the structure of the building for about 2 months prior to the drop. No one remembers who they worked for.

People always forget about building 4...that housed the world bank
..there was an estimated 200 Million dollars in gold and silver in their vault. It never been recovered.
Several years later there is a huge rush on gold and the price goes through the roof.

Why did 9/11 happen...

2000 gold was worth $270 an ounce
Say 135M of the banks bullion was gold...that's 500K ounces
Gold peeked at just over $1800
X 500K ounces= 900M in gold. (And the numbers I chose are probably lower than actual in regards to the ounces on hand)

So why 9/11...765 Million Dollars is a pretty good start.
Not to mention the government contracts, for war supplies, reconstruction, and such things.

Who?
I don't know but Haliberton would certainly have the money to back it, the manpower to pull it off, and the skills to do it behind everyones back.

It just so happens that the North woods planning was originally written up by Cheney and Rumsfeld some 30+ years prior.

Plane crashes seem to 'instantly' cause the plane to crumble/fold, but you'll see the failures of individual pieces as it goes... Same with bullet impacts....and bridge collapses.. and.. *gasp* structural collapse.

Cascade failures can be seen to 'happen in an instant', and with the debris cloud and smoke from the tower, it could obscure an otherwise ovious cascade failure.

Buildings are designed for static loads, and minor dynamic loads (wind, people moving, helicopters landing, etc).. Buildings are NOT designed to absorb THOUSANDS of tons of the floors above it FALLING ON TOP OF IT....

[FattyKrack]

I want to believe that no man or .gov would ever ever be capable of such a thing. But I do know one thing, there is a very large discrepancy of facts that may never be publicly known. And if anyone was capable of it, it was Cheney imo. Bin Laden probably could testify to that, but, well.. He ain't talking to nobody no how.

[H2obouget]

False flag reporting.

That article would have you believe that a bank, with millions in its vault, waited several weeks to verify their goods were intact?
And why the mention of blast marks? Or all the vehicles?
They are not germaine to the topic of gold and silver in a vault.

So why lie...hmmm..what would happen to the Bank of Nova Scotia if they reported the loss of that gold and silver?
Their customers would have demanded their money, gold, silver immediately...Bank of Nova Scotia would have collapsed under the rush.

For someone who called me a mindless conformist in another thread...you seem determined to believe every news story you come across at face value without doing any critical thinking on what you were expected to believe.

[TechnoWeenie]

I'm sure someone will say that the building 'could've held out, it held the weight before'..

1. Take a bowling ball.
2. Place bowling ball on foot.

This is a static load. The weight of the object is distributed evenly across the structure of your foot. Your foot is pressing up against the ball as much as the ball is pressing down due to gravity.

3. Pick up bowling ball.
4. Drop bowling ball on your foot from 3'

This is a dynamic load, the impact of the ball is much higher, putting a greater strain on the structure of the foot. The initial point of impact will absorb a lot of the force, then disperse the force amongst the bones, muscles, etc in an attempt to 'push' the ball away from it, equalizing the force of the downward impact. If the force cannot be equalized, something breaks (it's usually your foot).


5. Break your foot.
6. Drop bowling ball on foot again.


This is what a structure, on fire, whilst having a dynamic load applied to it that it wasn't designed for, is like... Having a huge dynamic load is bad enough (unbroken foot, bowling ball falling on it), but take an already damaged structure (broken foot) and put a huge dynamic load on it (falling bowling ball) and you WILL have a catastrophic failure. Each bone supports another, so while a bone may not break when you put a bowling ball on it, or when a bowling ball falls on it, if you have a broken foot, and drop a bowling ball on it, MORE bones will break..



My Cousin lived about 2 miles from the Pentagon, and watched the plane crash into it....



Yes, I'm sure there are some unexplained things, and I'm sure not everything is being said, like admitting to shooting down an american airliner... but I guarantee you if it comes out that our gov't had a hand in it, our nation would cease to exist..

Then again, I always thought that there'd be wholesale rioting and outright taking of the gov't by force if they ever admitted to widescale warrantless spying, and oh look, nothing happened.... (yet)

[H2obouget]

@TW

I work with metals in forges.
It takes SERIOUS CONTINUOUS HEAT to melt or even weaken steel.
You are not going to do jack all with paper, seats, chairs and wood fire to a chunk of steel greater than sheet metal...certainly not a freaking I beam supports for a sky skraper. And sky skrapers are not a static load. If they were they would eventually bend from wind.

If a building materials fire were capable of causing a sky skraper to melt, bend, twist, whatever silly logic you want to try.....why don't any of the other sky skraper fires we know about result in a building collapse?
Because steel buildings don't fall down from fires!

But hey fuck it..what the hell do I know...its not like experts in demolitions said it as a controlled demolition or anything. Oh wait, they did!

@everyone

Just because you can't fathom why someone would something like this, or you can't wrap you head around the logistics of making it happen, or you can't understand the physics behind it...doesn't mean it didn't happen.
And that is exactly how fear mongering works.
At some point every human hit synaptic over load and the brain simply stop believing that something is, can, did happen(ing).

[H2obouget]

If you want proof that the collapse could not happen as stated...buy 12 of those 2 cell cinder blocks.
Stack them like this
II
=
II
=
II
=
Now pick up the top 4 and drop them on the rest of the stack and see what results you get.

I got $20 that says you can't crush the entire stack straight down.

[kf7mjf]

False flag reporting.

That article would have you believe that a bank, with millions in its vault, waited several weeks to verify their goods were intact?
And why the mention of blast marks? Or all the vehicles?
They are not germaine to the topic of gold and silver in a vault.

So why lie...hmmm..what would happen to the Bank of Nova Scotia if they reported the loss of that gold and silver?
Their customers would have demanded their money, gold, silver immediately...Bank of Nova Scotia would have collapsed under the rush.

For someone who called me a mindless conformist in another thread...you seem determined to believe every news story you come across at face value without doing any critical thinking on what you were expected to believe.

And that is the problem with tinfoil hatters. Anything that doesn't fall into their invented world is "false flag" and thus can be immediately written off and anybody who accepts the "false flag" is guilty of simply being a sheep. Let me know when you wake up from your world of circular logic. Meanwhile, in the real world, a news article describing a chain of events, with interviewed people is taken more seriously than say 911justicehallifax.wordrpess.com that is to say, The New York Times is likely going to be a more legitimate source than Tinfoil Timmy pounding away at a keyboard.

Anyway, here is another false flag http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/new ... e-1.927133 and here is hardcore, critical thinking. https://911justicehalifax.wordpress.com ... n-history/