>> ^Friesian:

One thing that stuck in my craw about this was his brief mention of how the collapse looked like a controlled demolition, and how he then compared the WTC collapse to an actual controlled demolition.
With my admittedly lacking knowledge, controlled demolitions have explosives throughout the whole building, including the lower floors. When they push the plunger for the controlled demolotion, you can see the explosions on each floor (including the lower floors) as the building starts to come down.
If this was a controlled demolition, disguised with the smoke and mirrors of an aircraft ramming into the side, why did we see no molten steel, smoke or other craziness coming out of the ground or first floor? Or any of the lower floors? AND from the bottom up (as I believe it is done in controlled demolition)?
Finally, even if all it would have taken to collapse the WTC in a manner which made it look like a controlled demolition is some thermite/thermate on the 50th odd floor (sorry, I forget exactly which floor the aircraft hit), isn't that a bit of a gamble on the part of the people behind the "conspiracy"? I mean, you need a pilot who is able to fly a passenger jet directly into the correct floor of a building. To me that sounds like a tough thing to do, hitting a building in exactly the right place while travelling at high speed. A slight cock-up from the pilot and you'd have plane explosion and damage in one place, and then 25 floors below you'd be able to see all this molten steel from the thermite/thermate? Bit of a give away if you ask me.
I dunno - if you're going to go to all these lengths to have a pretense to invade somewhere, surely you'd rely on a plan that didn't have a large chance to be immediately exposed? Maybe I've been ruined by Hollywood's crazy and grandiose schemes, but I'd like to think that the "bad guys" would come up with a better, and more reliable, plan than this?
edit: I feel I should mention that I do think it's odd how the WTC towers collapsed. Without going into the wonderful world of science, it just seems odd that any building hit that high up would collapse straight down—probably a throw-back to my childhood days of building towers with my play bricks and then throwing my toys at it. However, I just can't bring myself to accept that this was a controlled explosion. It just doesn't seem to add up to me, much in the same way that the actual collapse doesn't add up. My internal jury is still out on this one.


The buildings simply obeyed Newtonian mechanics. First you have inertia. It takes A HUGE FORCE with that much mass in play to make it go in any direction. But, guess what, nature is already forcing it to go in one direction--and it's winning. That direction is of course down, due to gravity. An object in motion tends to stay in motion, the building is ALREADY going down, that's why it has to be supported. When it began to pancake the mass continued in it's plane of reference and fell straight down. The structure below was meant to hold it up, but in a pancake scenario the side walls and supports are presented with lateral forces far higher (due to the mass and gravity) than designed to mitigate. With the ONE thing that was meant to hold up the building useless it simply continued all the way down.

Interestingly, the building hit the furthest down collapsed first (even though it was hit last). This lends more credence to gravity being the main player. Massive objects like that do not change direction easily; trust me it's the movies or you're watching very weak structures collapse. If a plane impact barely made it wobble, I doubt you could move it sideways unless you literally designed it to collapse that way. Again, inertia. Just think what it's like trying to push a train off a track. Now imagine pushing a building off a track. Won't happen unless it's designed to.

One thing that stuck in my craw about this was his brief mention of how the collapse looked like a controlled demolition, and how he then compared the WTC collapse to an actual controlled demolition.

With my admittedly lacking knowledge, controlled demolitions have explosives throughout the whole building, including the lower floors. When they push the plunger for the controlled demolotion, you can see the explosions on each floor (including the lower floors) as the building starts to come down.

If this was a controlled demolition, disguised with the smoke and mirrors of an aircraft ramming into the side, why did we see no molten steel, smoke or other craziness coming out of the ground or first floor? Or any of the lower floors? AND from the bottom up (as I believe it is done in controlled demolition)?

Finally, even if all it would have taken to collapse the WTC in a manner which made it look like a controlled demolition is some thermite/thermate on the 50th odd floor (sorry, I forget exactly which floor the aircraft hit), isn't that a bit of a gamble on the part of the people behind the "conspiracy"? I mean, you need a pilot who is able to fly a passenger jet directly into the correct floor of a building. To me that sounds like a tough thing to do, hitting a building in exactly the right place while travelling at high speed. A slight cock-up from the pilot and you'd have plane explosion and damage in one place, and then 25 floors below you'd be able to see all this molten steel from the thermite/thermate? Bit of a give away if you ask me.

I dunno - if you're going to go to all these lengths to have a pretense to invade somewhere, surely you'd rely on a plan that didn't have a large chance to be immediately exposed? Maybe I've been ruined by Hollywood's crazy and grandiose schemes, but I'd like to think that the "bad guys" would come up with a better, and more reliable, plan than this?

edit: I feel I should mention that I do think it's odd how the WTC towers collapsed. Without going into the wonderful world of science, it just seems odd that any building hit that high up would collapse straight down—probably a throw-back to my childhood days of building towers with my play bricks and then throwing my toys at it. However, I just can't bring myself to accept that this was a controlled explosion. It just doesn't seem to add up to me, much in the same way that the actual collapse doesn't add up. My internal jury is still out on this one.

if anyone could summarize what the possible presence of thermate in the debris means that would be great (sorry but the video is a bit long).

what are the only possible explanations for it's presence?

thanks

>> ^BoneyD:
What are you talking about? The link describes how clean up began fairly soon after the collapse, where they used thermite to cut the remaining columns. It could very well have been all over the place ...
... What I think is happening with conspiracy theorists is that they can't accept that the "simple people" of the Middle East are as smart and as resourceful as any westerner. It is hubris to assume that they are lesser people to be pittied and unable to comprehend what the West has been doing to them. America is a fantastic nation and has accomplished some truly amazing things in its history, but it really has to get this superiority chip off its shoulder and learn a little humility.


I do not see the people of the Middle East as "simple", and I resent your implication that I would be so ignorant.
I am also not American, so please stop throwing generalisations and hypothetical accusations at me.

Please look at the facts presented in the video, rather than basing your argument on opinions you have formed prior to watching it.


I can't speak for anyone else but I am not trying to assign blame to anyone here, neither to the American government nor to Al-Qaeda.

What I am saying is that planes striking the towers the way they did being the cause of the towers falling in such a clean and compact manner is highly unlikely, if not impossible.

Thermate was found to be throughout the dust from the collapse, covering several blocks, including in rooms four stories up. This is not localised thermate residue from the clean up of the site, there would be no need to cut any steel that far away.

The idea that two towers can fall cleanly into their own footprint from two plane strikes, and a third that was not struck also fall in the same manner, is incredible.
When combined with the information that Thermate, a material used in controlled demolition of buildings with steel structures, has been found all over a wide area in and around the site then the idea that only the planes caused the collapse seems ridiculous.

I would be just as happy if the government said that they agreed the terrorists appear to have used more than just the planes to bring down the towers and that they were going to commence an investigation of how they could have got the thermate and other explosives onto the site.

>> ^heathen:
>> ^BoneyD:
Ohh, for fuck's sake: http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

Have you actually watched this video? I don't see how your link is relevant?
This video is not discussing photos showing "angle of the cuts".
There is no accusation here related to firemen.
This is not related to the "yellow residue".
What is stated here is that the dust cloud from the collapse of the towers, that covered several blocks, contained thermate.
The dust cloud occurred prior to the cleanup operation.


What are you talking about? The link describes how clean up began fairly soon after the collapse, where they used thermite to cut the remaining columns. It could very well have been all over the place.

This other page they foward to (if you read my link?) talks about the absurdity of an apparatus required to set off a thermite cutting device on a column. Which would be bulky and clearly visible as the walls would have to be moved in to fit them.

Anyway, to be honest, I'm not up to scratch with all the physics here... because I don't need to be. I can accept that Al-Qaeda has the capasity and the will to pull off an attack as sophisticated as this, employing a style they have used before (ie. multiple simultaneous attacks on two or more targets), and the vast bulk of verifyable evidence points to this being the case. Richard Clarke stated in his book 'Against All Enemies' that an attack using airliners was not unknown as a probable tactic in intelligence circles.

What I think is happening with conspiracy theorists is that they can't accept that the "simple people" of the Middle East are as smart and as resourceful as any westerner. It is hubris to assume that they are lesser people to be pittied and unable to comprehend what the West has been doing to them. America is a fantastic nation and has accomplished some truly amazing things in its history, but it really has to get this superiority chip off its shoulder and learn a little humility.

>> ^BoneyD:
Ohh, for fuck's sake: http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm


Have you actually watched this video? I don't see how your link is relevant?

This video is not discussing photos showing "angle of the cuts".
There is no accusation here related to firemen.
This is not related to the "yellow residue".

What is stated here is that the dust cloud from the collapse of the towers, that covered several blocks, contained thermate.

The dust cloud occurred prior to the cleanup operation.

Very interesting video, which I recommend watching.

Short summary for those who may not have the time/patience to watch the whole thing:

- Thermate was found throughout the dust from the WTC collapse.

- Thermate is thermite that has been mixed with sulphur, to keep the iron in the thermite molten longer, which helps when using thermite to cut through steel.

MINK: "all the holograms and thermite stuff is just so you don't notice the..."

I want to hear the theory about the connection between the fall of the towers and holograms! Wow. I think I'm just going to start my own 911 conspiracies invovling hovercrafts and pixie sticks. I don't think anyone would take me seriously. I'm a fan of Bill Maher, and I think he's turned off by the theories about 911 because some of them are so over the top it starts to sound like dellusions. I don't think the planes were drones that hit those buildings. I don't think all of the shots of the angular cut beams were thermate blasts - I think some of those were taken after demo crews came in cutting the larger beams into smaller beams.

Still, there's some compelling evidence out there, and to ignore it outright is a mistake

It's actually a pretty interesting documentary. It's not terribly glib and self-reighteous in its approach, which is a good thing. I've been coming to videosift for a long time, but this is the first thing I've posted. I only did so because just recently I've been doing research on this subject - as much research as I can do without taking samples from Ground Zero myself. I think it's important to allow the hypothesis of thermate explosives used on September 11, 2001.

No, I'm saying that no photographic evidence of the interior columns being cut seem to exist (to the public).. specifically the one that is most known that we're referring to, it leaves one to wonder about it.

Par:
"Also, I would have thought that the "other halves" of the columns are not still in the pictures because they have been transported away. That was the reason for them having been cut, after all."
Then where is the crane that would have lifted the other piece... it's now shown and there was no sign of any scaffolding material or other equipment near the center column that the welders would have used because there was still too much debris all around that column when the photo was taken.

Par:
"Further, you seem to be implying that the photograph in question was supposed to have been officially repressed but has somehow slipped though the net In fact, it's been taken from a publically-available collection of photographs which document the clean-up operation."

Well that's your interpretation, not what I said. The photo in question does not clearly indicate that it was cut by welders after the fact or by thermate since they would look similar.. what I said is that they DID have to approve such photos from hitting the public. It's no secret that that specific photo and the other close up photos were taken by a limited number of photographers and the photo's WERE screened before their release.

While the steel was being removed from the site of the three largest and most mysterious structural failures in history, even the team FEMA had assembled to investigate the failures -- the Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT) -- was denied access to the evidence. The Science Committee of the House of Representatives later identified several aspects of the FEMA-controlled operation that prevented the conduct of an adquate investigation:

The BPAT did not control the steel. "The lack of authority of investigators to impound pieces of steel for investigation before they were recycled led to the loss of important pieces of evidence."
FEMA required BPAT members to sign confidentiality agreements that "frustrated the efforts of independent researchers to understand the collapse."
The BPAT was not granted access to "pertinent building documents."
"The BPAT team does not plan, nor does it have sufficient funding, to fully analyze the structural data it collected to determine the reasons for the collapse of the WTC buildings."
Gene Corley complained to the Committee that the Port Authority refused to give his investigators copies of the Towers' blueprints until he signed a wavier that the plans would not be used in a lawsuit against the agency.

There SHOULD have been more photographs and immediate investigation of 9/11 - one of the most profound events in our history is my main point here. I don't know for certain one way or the other if the official story is true yet. The government has a known history in maintaining secrets from the public, blocking investigations, censoring information, subversion, intimidation and gag-ordering whistleblowers. With all of this going on it's no wonder that the evidence that does exist yet neither proves anything one way or the other becomes controversial.

In reply to your comment:
“In the tags, what is "thermate"?”

Many people believe that the molten steel or iron that is shown in a couple of 9/11 and post-9/11 videos is caused by a patented demolition charge coil that is normally wrapped around a steel column in order to cut it cleanly and quickly.

Patent info"
http://www.dodtechmatch.com/DOD/Patent/PatentDetail.aspx?type=description&id=6766744

Analysis of steel samples from WTC steel:
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

"Thermate is an incendiary compound used for military applications. Thermate, whose primary component is thermite, also contains sulfur and possibly barium nitrate, both of which increase its thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature. Various mixtures of these compounds can be called thermate, but, to avoid confusion with Thermate-TH3, one can refer to them as thermite variants or analogs. The composition by weight of Thermate-TH3 (in military use) is 68.7% thermite, 29.0% barium nitrate, 2.0% sulfur and 0.3% binder."
- Wikipedia 06/24/07

In the tags, what is "thermate"?

yes, that is the exterior column.. the main interior column photos that have been seen by many people show absolutely no sign of welders in a cleanup operation and there is lots of debris around that interior column and no sign of the "other piece" that would have been cut from it. This leaves the question if whether the patented thermate cutting method was used.

I have yet to see any images of interior main columns being cut after the fact. One of the problems with this is that only one photographer was allowed in the restricted zone to take some photos during the cleanup process and the CIA had the "authority" to keep many photos from this photographers collection from reaching the public.

I find it amazing that the core structure was obliterated.

Are you kidding me? WTF is wrong with you people?!?!

These are the things you claim are garbage and bull:

1.) Testimonials from the firefighters that were there claiming explosions had been occurring at the WTC before and during the collapses.

2.) No real evidence that a *757 really crashed at the pentagon (my instrument flight class analyzed this and we determined that it was a cruise missle).

3.) Molten steel and evidence from one photo that one of the main beams was cut using thermate in the exact same fashion that demolition companies use to cut such a support beam. OMG it's staring at you in the face here!!!!

4.) Lack of wreckage from flight *93 indicates that it was shot down.

Grant it, there is a lot of hypothesis in this video, but if you believe the canned version that the Kean-Zelikow commission has spewed out (which unbelievably does not analyze the wreckage and other pertinent investigative information and clearly states that the funding of the terrorists is ultimately an unimportant factor.) then your either an idiot or a fool or both.

No matter even if Giuliani and pals outright told us that they played a part in it, the refuters of 9/11 conspiracy theorists would still refute the evidence. In their defense tho, for the longest time I felt the same way they do.

I refused to acknowledge the possibility of deceit from our government... I thought it inconceivable and eagerly awaited the evidence to be explained in the commission report. I was severely disappointed with the commission report and found it to be biased and was an attempt to reinforce the "official" story. I then picked up a copy of the 9/11 commission report - Ommissions and distortions. I was extremely impressed with the unbiased analytical analysis. This prompted me to dig deeper, to find as much evidence or conjecture regarding the tragic events of that day. I think the most incriminating evidence is the molten pools of steel at the base of the collapse and the steel pillar that was left standing that was obviously cut with thermate.

I was appalled that Henry Kissinger was assigned to spearhead the commission report. Talk about letting the fox guard the henhouse!!!