The Mental Militia Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition  (Read 11903 times)

Alton Speers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1850
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« on: June 14, 2005, 11:52:55 am »

Is the wall of silence beginning to crumble?
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20...02755-6408r.htm

Alton
Logged

Mr. Bill

  • Guest
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2005, 01:09:49 pm »

I guess this is the "long version" of the story:

Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse? by Morgan Reynolds

I'm not very knowledgeable about "alternate explanations" of the WTC collapse, but if I'm understanding this guy right, he's saying the first plane impact DID NOT OCCUR AT ALL, and the damage was caused entirely by explosives. So what was it, mass delusion of the NYC residents who saw the plane hit? I'm sure there was even one video showing the impact, by someone who just happened to be filming when it happened.

Or maybe I'm mis-reading what he's saying.
Logged

Jeffersoniantoo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 958
  • Green Valley Gulch, MYOBLand
    • Freedom Port: Firefly
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2005, 01:32:36 pm »

The first plane is shown hitting the WTC while a French film crew as doing a documntary on the fire department.  It was shown on the CBS 911 special (which I taped).  I als have lots of video of the second plane hitting.  This is from the same day, network coverage, by NBC and FOX.

Whether they brought down the trade center or not I cannot say, but they hit the buildings.
Logged
"Written laws are like spiders' webs, and will, like them, only entangle and hold the poor and weak, while the rich and powerful easily break through them."

-- Anacharsis - (Scythian philosopher - 600 B.C.)

Mos2

  • Guest
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2005, 03:00:53 pm »

So we should believe an economist over a structural engineer? The documentary on TLC was fairly convincing to me - floors pancaking because the fire weakened the structrual supports. If anything is learned from this, it would be to not ban asbestos fireproofing.  
Logged

rhinoman

  • Guest
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #4 on: June 14, 2005, 04:31:59 pm »

There are photo's of people standing on the floors in the opening were the plane entered the building, were the flames are shooting out, right BEFORE the building colapses. If the flames were hot enough to MELT the steel beams than how the heck are the people standing RIGHT THERE alive? That's wierd. I don't know what to think of all this but I do not think that the truth has been told as to how the buildings collapsed.
Logged

Harleqwin

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 571
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2005, 04:37:13 pm »

Quote
The documentary on TLC was fairly convincing to me - floors pancaking because the fire weakened the structrual supports.
Mos, what the documentary does not explain, or even mention is the construction of the WTC towers.  Both were supported by the center of the building, which were composed of 6 (?) elevators 4 stairwells and the requisite supporting columns.  In fact, the center core of the WTC towers were designed to withstand the gravity load of the building.  

Think of a strong steel rod going through  the middle of the floors, except the steel rod takes up a quarter of the floor space.

What has been "Officially explained" is that one floor fell on another, then those fell down, and so on - the "pancake theory".  That explanation ignores the center building support because it won't work the way we all saw it work.  If the pancaking started, and there is a STRONG central support to the building, one side of the building will fall faster than another side....they are seperated from each other by the considerable bulk of the center core.  Since that did not happen, not ONCE but TWICE...the pancake theory is inconsistent with the visual facts.

(grumble)  [_[  the wife is calling with dinner now, if you'd like a better explanation than I can provide, please say so.  I will post links to the longer, more detailed explanation.  But for starters, take a look at the FEMA report.  Quite interesting what the only REAL Official explanation has to say...


 
Logged
The 'ideal' America praised by so many is nothing more than smoke from the propaganda machine. At best it is an idealized abstraction, at worst a wall to rational thought -IKDR

"But there's nothing wrong with me,   This is how I'm supposed to be,   In a land of make believe,   That don't believe in me"
"To find what you believe,   And I leave behind,   This hurricane of fucking lies,    I lost my faith to this,   This town that don't exist" - Green Day

Alton Speers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1850
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2005, 05:45:13 pm »

Here's another one to check out for alternative theories:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html

Alton
 
Logged

ultralongrunner

  • Guest
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2005, 06:22:24 pm »

As a structural fire fighter, I know that anything made of steel, when exposed to heat for a decent time, will fail. Any building that has, say a steel supported roof is a death trap.  This fact is marked by a number of deaths in the fire service.  

It seems plausible that once the fire protection was removed from the steel by the force of the impact, it would fail, no matter if it was jet fuel burning or paper/office contents. How this caused the collapse in the way it did is beyond my training and education.  Better fire protection at the contruction would have saved the building.  

ultralongrunner
Logged

Basil Fishbone

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2091
    • http://
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2005, 06:29:35 pm »

From the information I've seen, there has never ever been a structural failure and collapse of a steel-framed skyscraper, even in the face of much fiercer and longer-lasting fires.

Basil
Logged

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4912
  • TMM
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2005, 07:58:04 pm »

Quote
As a structural fire fighter, I know that anything made of steel, when exposed to heat for a decent time, will fail. Any building that has, say a steel supported roof is a death trap.  This fact is marked by a number of deaths in the fire service. 

It seems plausible that once the fire protection was removed from the steel by the force of the impact, it would fail, no matter if it was jet fuel burning or paper/office contents. How this caused the collapse in the way it did is beyond my training and education.  Better fire protection at the contruction would have saved the building. 

ultralongrunner
ultralongrunner, you may wish to tread very gently here. Anyone who assists in the government's coverup of the truth of 911 shall be revealed.

I would like to ask you to find one - just one - major steel building which has collapsed because of fire, even intense fire. Just one steel building anywhere in history which collapsed due to fire.

If you can show me that, can name the steel building and the date on which it collapsed (due to fire), I can become a hero for the government.

While you're hunting for that piece of info, I would invite you to also pay very close attention to what rhinoman has said above. I, too, have the film footage of a woman standing in the hole created by the wing of whichever plane hit the north tower. (It may not have been flight 11) She is standing there looking down to the earth at the exact place where the jet engine on the left wing of the plane entered the building. There is not sufficient heat at the impact area to prevent her from 1) being alive and 2) from walking to the face of the building and looking out the hole made by the plane. The footage I possess on that is irrefutable and came from more than one news-network's film crews which were shooting at the scene after the attacks that morning.

Anyone wishing to know the truth about the explosives inside the buildings that morning can start learning the sick facts by reading this article:

http://www.thementalmilitia.org/modules.ph...order=0&thold=0

I am on record all over the Internet with dated posts stating that elements (people) inside our own government executed the attacks of 911 for the purpose of initiating a global Empire and a domestic police state, all under the guise of a manufactured "War on Terror".  Proving James Meigs at Popular Mechanics to be a liar, and a deliberate liar at that, was so easy that I could hardly contain myself. Toward the bottom of that article I linked, above, is a statement which was filmed and broadcast nationally - by Larry Silverstein - and his statement was issued after NIST and FEMA put forth their lies about WTC7. Read the article carefully and you'll see something very frightening and very damning.

Salute!
Elias
(edited to change the building number and flight number mentioned in conjunction with the photographs of a woman standing in the hole-of-entry in the North Tower. I had wrongly stated that she was in the South Tower, which was allegedly hit by Flight 175. Flight 11 hit the North Tower, which is where the woman was filmed looking out of the hole in the side of the building.)
« Last Edit: June 14, 2005, 10:45:44 pm by Elias Alias »
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

Jack21221

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 977
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2005, 08:06:57 pm »

Quote
I would like to ask you to find one - just one - major steel building which has collapsed because of fire, even intense fire. Just one steel building anywhere in history which collapsed due to fire.

I can name two, and the dates:

Both world trade center towers in New York City on September 11th, 2001.

Prove me wrong.
Logged

ultralongrunner

  • Guest
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2005, 09:48:41 pm »

Quote
ultralongrunner, you may wish to tread very gently here. Anyone who assists in the government's coverup of the truth of 911 shall be revealed.

I would like to ask you to find one - just one - major steel building which has collapsed because of fire, even intense fire. Just one steel building anywhere in history which collapsed due to fire.

 
Elias:

Trust me, I'm not trying to support the government position on this at all.  But I've been in steel buildings, watching the structural members twist and bend to the heat of flames and hoping that the roof didn't come down on my head.  

Given what I know about fire fighting, building construction and what I have seen, I feel that it is quite likely that the building came down like it was described.  If anything, the government is to blame for not building the structure to the current building codes with regard to fire.

As a holder of a high explosives license, I've worked on control demolitions.  Before a building can be taken down, the structural integrity of the building must be weakened--exactly what fire did in this situation.  (Which is why OKC couldn't have happened the way it did.)

I don't want to get into a pissing match.  I've expressed my opinion and you have done so also.  No problem.

ultralongrunner
Logged

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4912
  • TMM
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #12 on: June 14, 2005, 10:22:40 pm »

Quote
Quote
I would like to ask you to find one - just one - major steel building which has collapsed because of fire, even intense fire. Just one steel building anywhere in history which collapsed due to fire.

I can name two, and the dates:

Both world trade center towers in New York City on September 11th, 2001.

Prove me wrong.
First, I would like an answer from ultralongrunner, to whom I addressed the question of steel buildings which have allegedly collapsed due to fire. His statements regarding fire and steel buildings may be misleading. I am told by several sources that no steel building in the history of steel buildings has ever been collapsed by fire, yet ultralongrunner seems to have evidence to the contrary about that. If he can name just one steel building which has been collapsed by fire, I know a lot of people who would dearly love to receive that information.

Secondly, the government's official story is that the twin towers were collapsed by intense fire, despite the fact that no other steel building in history is known to have collapsed by fire, and if the government's story is true, it shall mark the first time in the history of man-made steel buildings in which a steel building was collapsed by fire. Amazingly, on 911, not just one building is alleged to have collapsed by fire, but three. You see, not only does the government state that the twin towers were brought down by fire, it also claims that WTC 7 was also brought down by a combination of fire and weakened "faces". (See my article at the link above for full details on NIST and FEMA reports as published in Popular Mechanics Magazine in their March, 2005 issue.) So when you ask me to prove that the twin towers were not brought down by fire, you are asking me to prove that the government is lying. I have already done so, as you shall see. If the government has lied about WTC 7, why should you and I think the government is not lying about WTC 1 and WTC 2? In fact, if the government has lied about WTC 7,  it should then be on the government's back to prove it is not lying about WTC 1 and WTC 2.

I do indeed claim that the government is lying. I claim that controlled demolitions brought down all three WTC buildings which collapsed on 911 - WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7.  I shall consider proving that to you, providing that you'll first agree to read the materials I bring forth. For instance, in the above link in which I addressed ultralongrunner, I included a link. Did you click that link and then read that page? If you did, you already know that the  WTC lease-owner for the whole WTC complex was one Mr. Larry Silverstein, and you already know that he has stated publicly that the building WTC7 was "pulled", or, in other words, made to collapse by the use of well-engineered controlled demolition. The official government story about WTC 7 completely ignores what the owner said, that he and the FDNY decided to do to bring WTC 7 down. Either Mr. Silverstein is a liar, or the government is a liar, and if you read that article you shall see that for yourself.

So before I begin the laborious process of dragging up all the proof necessary to convince you that the government is lying about how the twin towers came down on 911,  I would like to receive your spoken agreement that you shall at least read the evidence I bring here for you. Is that fair enough? :)

As a beginning, after you read my indictment on the Editor of Popular Mechanics Magazine and his lies, why not also read this article which is over at Lew Rockwell dot com?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html

Elias
(post edited to give the nod to Alton Speers, who posted that Lew Rockwell link earlier in the thread. Sorry to repeat that link - I had overlooked it until re-reading the thread just now. Shoulda known that Alton would already have that link, lol.)
« Last Edit: June 14, 2005, 10:39:18 pm by Elias Alias »
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4912
  • TMM
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #13 on: June 14, 2005, 10:37:02 pm »

Quote
Quote
ultralongrunner, you may wish to tread very gently here. Anyone who assists in the government's coverup of the truth of 911 shall be revealed.

I would like to ask you to find one - just one - major steel building which has collapsed because of fire, even intense fire. Just one steel building anywhere in history which collapsed due to fire.

 
Elias:

Trust me, I'm not trying to support the government position on this at all.  But I've been in steel buildings, watching the structural members twist and bend to the heat of flames and hoping that the roof didn't come down on my head.  

Given what I know about fire fighting, building construction and what I have seen, I feel that it is quite likely that the building came down like it was described.  If anything, the government is to blame for not building the structure to the current building codes with regard to fire.

As a holder of a high explosives license, I've worked on control demolitions.  Before a building can be taken down, the structural integrity of the building must be weakened--exactly what fire did in this situation.  (Which is why OKC couldn't have happened the way it did.)

I don't want to get into a pissing match.  I've expressed my opinion and you have done so also.  No problem.

ultralongrunner
Agreed, ultralongrunner, no "pissing match" is needed here. :)

Actually, though, you're just the guy I've been hoping to run into. You stated that you have "been in steel buildings, watching the structural members twist and bend to the heat of flames". I would like to proceed very slowly and methodically here. First, I would like to ask you if during any of your experiences inside (or nearby) steel buildings which sustained high-heat fires, you have ever seen anything like this?

http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0111/ima...Biggart5-24.jpg

To me, it seems that I see steel beams being jettisoned outward from the periphery of the building with great force. That is more than just "twisting and bending", wouldn't you agree?

I have another question for ya after we discuss that photo, if you're okay with me asking. It is a doozy! :)

Thanks very much in advance for your reply,
Elias
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

ultralongrunner

  • Guest
WTC Collapse was Controlled Demolition
« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2005, 12:18:37 am »

Quote
Actually, though, you're just the guy I've been hoping to run into. You stated that you have "been in steel buildings, watching the structural members twist and bend to the heat of flames". I would like to proceed very slowly and methodically here. First, I would like to ask you if during any of your experiences inside (or nearby) steel buildings which sustained high-heat fires, you have ever seen anything like this?

http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0111/ima...Biggart5-24.jpg

To me, it seems that I see steel beams being jettisoned outward from the periphery of the building with great force. That is more than just "twisting and bending", wouldn't you agree?

I have another question for ya after we discuss that photo, if you're okay with me asking. It is a doozy! :)

Thanks very much in advance for your reply,
Elias
Elias:
 
Nope. But then again, I haven't been around many buildings that airplanes have crashed into. The closest was a Cesna that augered into a farm field. Messy.

Regarding the picture. Noted that there was no flame showing.  All of the high order explosives that I've worked with there is a flame with the blast. Also, I have no idea as to the structural strength of the steel that is being blown out.  Steel is strange in that way.  We all think of it as quite strong, but under the right circumstances, it falls apart.  

I have seen similar types of stuff flying out of windows during FX shoots.  We used air mortars/cannons. Quite impresive as to what air can do if used right.

Next time you are at Walmart, look at the ceiling. If they are built like the ones down here, it will be supported by steel.  When heated, directly or otherwise, these beams first expand and as they loose strength, the roof comes down.  So, you not only have to deal with collapsing walls, but the roof coming in.  It is my understanding that the WTC was built of the same sorts of materials.  

Now, was there a conspiracy regarding the WTC?  Maybe.  The paranoid side of me wonders it seems quite similar to Pearl Harbor--all the powers that be needed to do was stand aside and let someone else do their dirty work.

Someone might very well have helped the building come down.  I don't think so, given what I've seen given what my experience and training says.  But no matter what, we'll never really know as all the evidence is pretty well gone...

ultralongrunner
FF/NREMT-P
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4   Go Up