Explosives found in World Trade Center dust

[DiveCon]

9/11rimjob and id-eots still using bullshit videos as if they actually mean anything

 

[SFC Ollie]

9/11rimjob and id-eots still using bullshit videos as if they actually mean anything

Only now they've upgraded to Hollywood comedies. They are actually more believable.

 

[DiveCon]

9/11rimjob and id-eots still using bullshit videos as if they actually mean anything

Only now they've upgraded to Hollywood comedies. They are actually more believable.

they at least have better production quality
LOL

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Well, times up, and PE has joined my ignore list since he can't seem to answer one little question about his first video.

Now, it's 9/11 inside job's turn. He challenged me to watch one of the videos on Canada 9/11 Truth - Video Library. I chose one at random, Flight 77 - The White Plane.

I came up with the following questions, based on my watching all 36:54 minutes of the video.

The first witness claims the plane passed at treetop level over his house, over the Army-Navy Country Club, north of the Citgo station, and onward into the Pentagon. This would be ground effect flight, and experienced pilots could not manage this with any accuracy for the amount of time this would take, so how did this plane manage it?

Witness number 2 says the plane passed at treetop level over his golf course, (well south of the Citgo station) and onward into the Pentagon. Again, how could a pilot manage to fly in ground effect for this distance? Also, the witness claims twice that it was an American Airlines jet. Why does the interviewer browbeat him until he claims it was white?

Witness #3 says the plane was way south of the Citgo station. How does this square up with witness #1? Also this witness never said the plane was white, only that they saw numbers on the plane. Why does the narrator claim that she said it was white?

Witness #4 claims the plane had propellers. Why does the interviewer push her until she says it was a jet?

Witness #5 can't decide what color the plane was. Do you see him as credible?

Witnesses #6 through #9 are quoted, instead of interviewed. Why?

Witness #10 describes Air Force 2 as being the plane that hit the Pentagon. Why would the govt. use such a valuable asset for the attack?

Witness #11 says it flew over the Citgo station, contradicting the last 10 witnesses. Why should we believe him?

Witness #12 claims the plane was trying to pull up and avoid the Pentagon. Why do the other 11 witnesses not make this claim? Mr Turcios also says the plane was silver. Again, he makes a claim the other 11 do not. Who do we believe?

The members of 9/11 Truth claim they are trying to teach the rest of us that there was a cover-up of the events of Sept 11, 2001. Here is a chance to educate me about one aspect of that day.

If 9/11 inside job can't or won't answer these questions, I will listen to anyone else willing to answer them. (Except for PE, since I won't see anything he posts, ever again)

If I don't see a reply in a reasonable time, my ignore list goes up by one.

 

[DiveCon]

Air Force 2?
there is no aircraft designated that
the only time such a designation is given is when the VPOTUS is on ANY of the Air Force planes

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Air Force 2?
there is no aircraft designated that
the only time such a designation is given is when the VPOTUS is on ANY of the Air Force planes

The official plane for the vice president is the C-32, which is referred to as Air Force 2 when he is onboard. It is a specialized version of the 757. He also has the C-40 B/C (boeing 737) at his disposal, again AF2 when he's onboard.

The President doesn't use these planes, as they don't have the level of C3 functions he needs in a crisis, so they don't use the AF1 callsign.

 

[DiveCon]

Air Force 2?
there is no aircraft designated that
the only time such a designation is given is when the VPOTUS is on ANY of the Air Force planes

The official plane for the vice president is the C-32, which is referred to as Air Force 2 when he is onboard. It is a specialized version of the 757. He also has the C-40 B/C (boeing 737) at his disposal, again AF2 when he's onboard.

The President doesn't use these planes, as they don't have the level of C3 functions he needs in a crisis, so they don't use the AF1 callsign.

yes, but to say it was AF2 is just stupid when clearly the VP wasnt on board
LOL

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Well, times up, and PE has joined my ignore list since he can't seem to answer one little question about his first video.

Now, it's 9/11 inside job's turn. He challenged me to watch one of the videos on Canada 9/11 Truth - Video Library. I chose one at random, Flight 77 - The White Plane.

I came up with the following questions, based on my watching all 36:54 minutes of the video.

The first witness claims the plane passed at treetop level over his house, over the Army-Navy Country Club, north of the Citgo station, and onward into the Pentagon. This would be ground effect flight, and experienced pilots could not manage this with any accuracy for the amount of time this would take, so how did this plane manage it?

Witness number 2 says the plane passed at treetop level over his golf course, (well south of the Citgo station) and onward into the Pentagon. Again, how could a pilot manage to fly in ground effect for this distance? Also, the witness claims twice that it was an American Airlines jet. Why does the interviewer browbeat him until he claims it was white?

Witness #3 says the plane was way south of the Citgo station. How does this square up with witness #1? Also this witness never said the plane was white, only that they saw numbers on the plane. Why does the narrator claim that she said it was white?

Witness #4 claims the plane had propellers. Why does the interviewer push her until she says it was a jet?

Witness #5 can't decide what color the plane was. Do you see him as credible?

Witnesses #6 through #9 are quoted, instead of interviewed. Why?

Witness #10 describes the plane that hit the Pentagon as being painted in the same color scheme as the government version of the Boeing 757-200, which is designated as the C-32 by the Air Force, and known as Air Force 2 when the vice president is onboard. Why would the govt. use such a valuable asset for the attack?

Witness #11 says it flew over the Citgo station, contradicting the last 10 witnesses. Why should we believe him?

Witness #12 claims the plane was trying to pull up and avoid the Pentagon. Why do the other 11 witnesses not make this claim? Mr Turcios also says the plane was silver. Again, he makes a claim the other 11 do not. Who do we believe?

The members of 9/11 Truth claim they are trying to teach the rest of us that there was a cover-up of the events of Sept 11, 2001. Here is a chance to educate me about one aspect of that day.

If 9/11 inside job can't or won't answer these questions, I will listen to anyone else willing to answer them. (Except for PE, since I won't see anything he posts, ever again)

If I don't see a reply in a reasonable time, my ignore list goes up by one.


Edited to correct my question regarding Witness #10

 

[Wicked Jester]

Dr. Harrit is the lead scientist of a European, nine-author, peer-reviewed study*, which found millions of microscopic red-gray chips in the World Trade Center dust. These chips, at first thought to be paint, were ignited and determined to be unburned nanothermite

Common Ground - February 2011

Well, seeing as though a bomb went off in the parking structure of WTC back in the Clinton era, this should be a shock?

 

[DiveCon]

Dr. Harrit is the lead scientist of a European, nine-author, peer-reviewed study*, which found millions of microscopic red-gray chips in the World Trade Center dust. These chips, at first thought to be paint, were ignited and determined to be unburned nanothermite

Common Ground - February 2011

Well, seeing as though a bomb went off in the parking structure of WTC back in the Clinton era, this should be a shock?

not hard to believe that found these, since most of the components were used in the construction of the towers
steel, aluminum, there was sulfur in the gypsum wall planks

 

[Wicked Jester]

Common Ground - February 2011

Well, seeing as though a bomb went off in the parking structure of WTC back in the Clinton era, this should be a shock?

not hard to believe that found these, since most of the components were used in the construction of the towers
steel, aluminum, there was sulfur in the gypsum wall planks

Much of what was found is also used in the prevention of corrosion due to salt air.

It's all a bunch of nothing, YET AGAIN, put out by a bunch of loons.

 

[KissMy]

Well, seeing as though a bomb went off in the parking structure of WTC back in the Clinton era, this should be a shock?

WIKI: 1993 World Trade Center bombing

Yousef was assisted by Iraqi bomb maker Abdul Rahman Yasin, who helped assemble the complex 1,310 pounds (590 kg) bomb, which was made of a urea nitrate main charge with aluminum, magnesium and ferric oxide particles surrounding the explosive. The charge used nitroglycerine, ammonium nitrate dynamite, smokeless powder and fuse as booster explosives. Three tanks of bottled hydrogen were also placed in a circular configuration around the main charge, to enhance the fireball and afterburn of the solid metal particles. The use of compressed gas cylinders in this type of attack closely resembles the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing 10 years earlier. Both of these attacks used compressed gas cylinders to create fuel-air and thermobaric bombs that release more energy than conventional high explosives. According to testimony in the bomb trial, only once before the 1993 attack had the FBI recorded a bomb that used urea nitrate.

 

[eots]

Well, seeing as though a bomb went off in the parking structure of WTC back in the Clinton era, this should be a shock?

not hard to believe that found these, since most of the components were used in the construction of the towers
steel, aluminum, there was sulfur in the gypsum wall planks

Much of what was found is also used in the prevention of corrosion due to salt air.

It's all a bunch of nothing, YET AGAIN, put out by a bunch of loons.

you parrot that from popular mechanics without any real knowledge or questioning of the explanation ...

 

[eots]

Well, seeing as though a bomb went off in the parking structure of WTC back in the Clinton era, this should be a shock?

WIKI: 1993 World Trade Center bombing

Yousef was assisted by Iraqi bomb maker Abdul Rahman Yasin, who helped assemble the complex 1,310 pounds (590 kg) bomb, which was made of a urea nitrate main charge with aluminum, magnesium and ferric oxide particles surrounding the explosive. The charge used nitroglycerine, ammonium nitrate dynamite, smokeless powder and fuse as booster explosives. Three tanks of bottled hydrogen were also placed in a circular configuration around the main charge, to enhance the fireball and afterburn of the solid metal particles. The use of compressed gas cylinders in this type of attack closely resembles the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing 10 years earlier. Both of these attacks used compressed gas cylinders to create fuel-air and thermobaric bombs that release more energy than conventional high explosives. According to testimony in the bomb trial, only once before the 1993 attack had the FBI recorded a bomb that used urea nitrate.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Well, seeing as though a bomb went off in the parking structure of WTC back in the Clinton era, this should be a shock?

WIKI: 1993 World Trade Center bombing

Yousef was assisted by Iraqi bomb maker Abdul Rahman Yasin, who helped assemble the complex 1,310 pounds (590 kg) bomb, which was made of a urea nitrate main charge with aluminum, magnesium and ferric oxide particles surrounding the explosive. The charge used nitroglycerine, ammonium nitrate dynamite, smokeless powder and fuse as booster explosives. Three tanks of bottled hydrogen were also placed in a circular configuration around the main charge, to enhance the fireball and afterburn of the solid metal particles. The use of compressed gas cylinders in this type of attack closely resembles the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing 10 years earlier. Both of these attacks used compressed gas cylinders to create fuel-air and thermobaric bombs that release more energy than conventional high explosives. According to testimony in the bomb trial, only once before the 1993 attack had the FBI recorded a bomb that used urea nitrate.

Dan Rather: "might, might even have been able to stop the bombing"

Jaqueline Adams: "might have been able to stop the bombing.

Using the word "might" leaves a lot of wiggle room.

By the same level of squirming journalism,

Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov might, MIGHT, have been able to stop the Oklahoma City bombing.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

HEY CRAZY BATTERY GUY IS BACK...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-XA0Rv1Ng8

NIST caught lying their asses off and the OCTA's here can only cry in defeat.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Well, seeing as though a bomb went off in the parking structure of WTC back in the Clinton era, this should be a shock?

WIKI: 1993 World Trade Center bombing

Yousef was assisted by Iraqi bomb maker Abdul Rahman Yasin, who helped assemble the complex 1,310 pounds (590 kg) bomb, which was made of a urea nitrate main charge with aluminum, magnesium and ferric oxide particles surrounding the explosive. The charge used nitroglycerine, ammonium nitrate dynamite, smokeless powder and fuse as booster explosives. Three tanks of bottled hydrogen were also placed in a circular configuration around the main charge, to enhance the fireball and afterburn of the solid metal particles. The use of compressed gas cylinders in this type of attack closely resembles the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing 10 years earlier. Both of these attacks used compressed gas cylinders to create fuel-air and thermobaric bombs that release more energy than conventional high explosives. According to testimony in the bomb trial, only once before the 1993 attack had the FBI recorded a bomb that used urea nitrate.

someone replied to this slinging shit in defeat. Great stuff Eots.Yeah they tried it under Clinton with his blessing before in 93 and failed but came back and succeeded under Bush the next time.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The really weird thing is that until recently there probably wasn't 10 tons of nano thermite available anywhere because it was to hard, and too expensive, to make in bulk.

If tons of thermite were used then there should be evidence. Huge piles of slag or molten steel. Where is the evidence? I have yet to see any slag or molten steel.

This is what thermite residue should look like.

FEMA STATEMENT on 9/11:

Challenge: “[T]o form a molten iron-oxygen-sulfur eutectic at about 1000° C would require a very high concentration of sulfur… The fact that sulfur evaporates at a low temperature, 445° C, along with the very low levels of elemental sulfur in office buildings appears to preclude the possibility that the eutectic could have formed as a result of a slow sulfidation process in the debris pile.”

FEMA Response: Appendix C: “No clear explanation for the source of sulfur has been identified…A detailed study into the mechanisms of the phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.”


BuildingWhat? - Building 7 | Stand with the 911 families demanding a NEW Building 7 investigation - What is Building 7 ?

Great stuff there.as you can see Physics,the OCTA trolls here can only fling shit in defeat to this post like the monkeys they are. those firefightes who were experienced in explosives, appropriately called the 9/11 coverup commission, a half baked farce.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Actually we point out the facts, you know, those annoying little things like the pictures of the meteor that shows unmelted rebar running all through it. And the pictures that show what looks like it might be something red hot yet paper lying right next to it undamaged.

Do play again.

 

[Wicked Jester]

What, these loons still don't have any facts?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Oh well, i'll check back again in a couple o' weeks. You know, just to see if they come back with any facts, or some shit like that.