FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Albury Smith]

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

This is part of your evidence that towers demolished by explosives? Are you serious? You must blindly believe what people are telling you this stuff says without actually reading for yourself.

Am I right?

Here is what James Quintiere actually says in another interview located here: Onderzoeker James Quintiere (NIST) roept op tot "second opinion" 9/11 - Stormfront

Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives. “If you go to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was a line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the ‘conspiracy theories’ that says the smoke puffing out all around the building is due to somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I think, more likely, it’s one of the floors falling down.”

Not to mention that he has written a book, SpringerLink - Book Chapter in which he states the following:

An alternative cause is considered that puts the cause on insufficient insulation of the steel truss floor members.

So you either intentionally lied about James Quintiere's thinking that he supposedly supported the towers being demolished, or you just blindly believed what you were told by someone else that his comments supported a controlled demolition WITHOUT doing any further research yourself.

So far you and 9/11 inside job are batting .000 with your so called facts. I like how 9/11 inside job ran like coward when he was caught using incorrect information.

Is that what you conspiracy folks do when you get backed into a corner instead of admitting you were wrong?

One thing they LOVE to do is block people from posting if they don't drink the Kool-Aid. Try disagreeing with the bullshit spewed at the Loose Change "Forum" or any others run by truther nuts. I asked a knucklehead at LCF, who was lying about Silverstein's quote, why all of his insurers paid him if he admitted to blowing up WTC 7. The moderator of that freak show told me my question wasn't "sincere enough," and banned me for life. Some "truth movement," huh?

 

[Albury Smith]

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Do you even read any of this stuff or just blindly post it in hopes that people won't read it?

Since you supposedly read and understood the above linked information, could you please point out the specific refutations of the 130 page NIST report regarding collapse of building 7? I am interested in what specific evidence you find as proof.

You seem to like to hide behind links videos when someone asks you to explain in your own words why you find particular evidence to support your beliefs. You you seem to also ignore counter arguments that disprove your own incorrect statements.

Examples in this thread alone:
1. When you stated that ALL the members of building 7 failed at exactly the same time, there is video proof that this is incorrect. You never addressed that.
2. Your incorrect assumptions and information about the affects of heat on steel and the difference between a MELTING point and at what point steel WEAKENS
3. Your incorrect usage of James Quintiere's statements in quotes to make it seem like he supported your belief's that the towers and building 7 were demolished by explosives when he CLEARLY stated otherwise.
4. What about the possibility that the "molten steel" was actually "molten aluminum"? The temperatures of a normal office fire exceed the melting point of aluminum. No comments? I didn't think so.

Care to discuss? Probably not. My guess is you'll post more links instead of answering for yourself. Talk about being led around by the nose.

Ball's in your court. Whatchya got?

Molten metal could also have been lead from batteries in a UPS system, and the stuff pouring out of the northeast corner of Tower 2 around the 81st floor almost definitely was. The nuts think that was evidence of a column melting, right where the fuselage wound up, and a UPS system was sitting.

 

[Albury Smith]

oh come on your with glen on this one...


YouTube - Glenn Beck: "I hate 9/11 victims families for asking questions"

you dont even understand WHO he is talking abotu on that one
so your perception of where beck is isnt even where beck is

I don't even know what a abotu is...sounds samoan ?...but I'm pretty sure your friend glen was talking about hating 9/11 victims families that are seeking justice

Don't even go there. Have you seen how much respect the Loose Change creeps give to the victims on the hijacked planes?
http://www.911myths.com/LooseChangeCreatorsSpeak.pdf

 

[Gamolon]

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Do you even read any of this stuff or just blindly post it in hopes that people won't read it?

Since you supposedly read and understood the above linked information, could you please point out the specific refutations of the 130 page NIST report regarding collapse of building 7? I am interested in what specific evidence you find as proof.

You seem to like to hide behind links videos when someone asks you to explain in your own words why you find particular evidence to support your beliefs. You you seem to also ignore counter arguments that disprove your own incorrect statements.

Examples in this thread alone:
1. When you stated that ALL the members of building 7 failed at exactly the same time, there is video proof that this is incorrect. You never addressed that.
2. Your incorrect assumptions and information about the affects of heat on steel and the difference between a MELTING point and at what point steel WEAKENS
3. Your incorrect usage of James Quintiere's statements in quotes to make it seem like he supported your belief's that the towers and building 7 were demolished by explosives when he CLEARLY stated otherwise.
4. What about the possibility that the "molten steel" was actually "molten aluminum"? The temperatures of a normal office fire exceed the melting point of aluminum. No comments? I didn't think so.

Care to discuss? Probably not. My guess is you'll post more links instead of answering for yourself. Talk about being led around by the nose.

Ball's in your court. Whatchya got?

Molten metal could also have been lead from batteries in a UPS system, and the stuff pouring out of the northeast corner of Tower 2 around the 81st floor almost definitely was. The nuts think that was evidence of a column melting, right where the fuselage wound up, and a UPS system was sitting.

I forgot about that. Thanks.

 

[Albury Smith]

Do you even read any of this stuff or just blindly post it in hopes that people won't read it?

Since you supposedly read and understood the above linked information, could you please point out the specific refutations of the 130 page NIST report regarding collapse of building 7? I am interested in what specific evidence you find as proof.

You seem to like to hide behind links videos when someone asks you to explain in your own words why you find particular evidence to support your beliefs. You you seem to also ignore counter arguments that disprove your own incorrect statements.

Examples in this thread alone:
1. When you stated that ALL the members of building 7 failed at exactly the same time, there is video proof that this is incorrect. You never addressed that.
2. Your incorrect assumptions and information about the affects of heat on steel and the difference between a MELTING point and at what point steel WEAKENS
3. Your incorrect usage of James Quintiere's statements in quotes to make it seem like he supported your belief's that the towers and building 7 were demolished by explosives when he CLEARLY stated otherwise.
4. What about the possibility that the "molten steel" was actually "molten aluminum"? The temperatures of a normal office fire exceed the melting point of aluminum. No comments? I didn't think so.

Care to discuss? Probably not. My guess is you'll post more links instead of answering for yourself. Talk about being led around by the nose.

Ball's in your court. Whatchya got?

Molten metal could also have been lead from batteries in a UPS system, and the stuff pouring out of the northeast corner of Tower 2 around the 81st floor almost definitely was. The nuts think that was evidence of a column melting, right where the fuselage wound up, and a UPS system was sitting.

I forgot about that. Thanks.

Yep, a big UPS system would easily have several tons of lead in it, and they would have been all over the towers and WTC 7, given the number of financial services tenants in there. To claim that the molten metal pouring out of one corner of WTC 2 before its collapse was evidence of a few columns melting is just plain ignorance. The molten metal in the debris two or three months later wouldn't have been evidence of incendiaries, either. They burn hot and then go out in ~5 minutes, and would have cooled completely in a few hours. 'course facts don't mean much to truther nuts.

 

[Toro]

you dont even understand WHO he is talking abotu on that one
so your perception of where beck is isnt even where beck is

I don't even know what a abotu is...sounds samoan ?...but I'm pretty sure your friend glen was talking about hating 9/11 victims families that are seeking justice

Don't even go there. Have you seen how much respect the Loose Change creeps give to the victims on the hijacked planes?
http://www.911myths.com/LooseChangeCreatorsSpeak.pdf

I want to know what happened to the 100 passengers on the flight that allegedly didn't crashed into the Pentagon, which was - allegedly - hit by a missile instead.

Where did they go? They found personal effects at the site. Family members had funerals for them. They checked in. What happened to them?

 

[Gamolon]

Molten metal could also have been lead from batteries in a UPS system, and the stuff pouring out of the northeast corner of Tower 2 around the 81st floor almost definitely was. The nuts think that was evidence of a column melting, right where the fuselage wound up, and a UPS system was sitting.

I forgot about that. Thanks.

Yep, a big UPS system would easily have several tons of lead in it, and they would have been all over the towers and WTC 7, given the number of financial services tenants in there. To claim that the molten metal pouring out of one corner of WTC 2 before its collapse was evidence of a few columns melting is just plain ignorance. The molten metal in the debris two or three months later wouldn't have been evidence of incendiaries, either. They burn hot and then go out in ~5 minutes, and would have cooled completely in a few hours. 'course facts don't mean much to truther nuts.

Another thing. What columns are they saying were supposedly "cut" to produce that "molten metal"? If it was the core columns, how did the "river" of "molten metal" from the core columns travel from the center core columns to and then out of the perimeter windows? How much molten metal do they think is produced in a thermite cut of a single column? Not to mention that the "molten metal" from the core columns would have fallen DOWN THE SHAFTS or pooled in the core proper.

Amazing logic these people have.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

errr no,anyone who watches the 47 videos I have posted countless numbers of times in the past that you Bush dupes constantly ignore and still thinks it WASNT bombed is on drugs.I would post them for you but your obviously a dis in fo agent so it would be a total waste of time since as we both know,you wont watch them.

Have you posted them on this thread? Maybe they'll show those reinforced concrete cores that that your buddy is hallucinating about. I'm game. Btw, I'm not a "Bush dupe" and can't stand the son of a bitch.

I believe a bush dupe is someone who believes the bush/Cheney version of the events of 9/11..regardless if you can stand him or not ...you have indeed been duped by what is essentialy ..his story...all following investigations by fema and the 911 commission soul purpose was to select or omit facts.and create a report to fit...the bush story

yes thats EXACTLY what a Bush dupe is.Thanks for clearing that up for me on what a Bush dupe is Eots.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Typical psyops response, pretending to be confused seeking to confuse others.

A sick obfuscation intended to keep the means of mass murder secret.

They are not "core columns". They are made of sections joined togther that sometimes use "butt plates", which are very weak laterally.

the diagam show the way core columns must be joined.

sorry, no dice
i'm not the confused one
YOU are
you think there was a concrete wall where there wasnt one
and you cant even show a photo during construction that shows one

You want to confuse people so badly that you pretend to forget that it was you that was pretending to be confused.

BBwwwhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhaaaaa

I don't need to show construciton images because I can show the concrete core walls on 9-11.

And logically IF there was a conspiracy to decieve, powerful perpetrators would be able to access and remove all of the images from the construction that show concrete, just like the documentary I viewed in 1990 was removed from PBS.

If all of that were true, then you and all of the rest of the world would be completely unable to show an image from 9-11 that had the supposed steel core columns in the core area.

And that is true, you cannot show the supposed steel core columns on 9-11.

Keeping the means of mass murder secret is a sick business.

Not surprising since PBS is part of the corporate controlled media which always airs what fits THEIR version of events.they never show suppressed film footage and always omit witness testimonnys as well since it exposes their lies.

 

[eots]

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Do you even read any of this stuff or just blindly post it in hopes that people won't read it?

Since you supposedly read and understood the above linked information, could you please point out the specific refutations of the 130 page NIST report regarding collapse of building 7? I am interested in what specific evidence you find as proof.

You seem to like to hide behind links videos when someone asks you to explain in your own words why you find particular evidence to support your beliefs. You you seem to also ignore counter arguments that disprove your own incorrect statements.

Examples in this thread alone:
1. When you stated that ALL the members of building 7 failed at exactly the same time, there is video proof that this is incorrect. You never addressed that.
2. Your incorrect assumptions and information about the affects of heat on steel and the difference between a MELTING point and at what point steel WEAKENS
3. Your incorrect usage of James Quintiere's statements in quotes to make it seem like he supported your belief's that the towers and building 7 were demolished by explosives when he CLEARLY stated otherwise.
4. What about the possibility that the "molten steel" was actually "molten aluminum"? The temperatures of a normal office fire exceed the melting point of aluminum. No comments? I didn't think so.

Care to discuss? Probably not. My guess is you'll post more links instead of answering for yourself. Talk about being led around by the nose.

Ball's in your court. Whatchya got?

Molten metal could also have been lead from batteries in a UPS system, and the stuff pouring out of the northeast corner of Tower 2 around the 81st floor almost definitely was. The nuts think that was evidence of a column melting, right where the fuselage wound up, and a UPS system was sitting.

the firemen reporting molten metal.. where in the basement...

 

[Christophera]

I forgot about that. Thanks.

Yep, a big UPS system would easily have several tons of lead in it, and they would have been all over the towers and WTC 7, given the number of financial services tenants in there. To claim that the molten metal pouring out of one corner of WTC 2 before its collapse was evidence of a few columns melting is just plain ignorance. The molten metal in the debris two or three months later wouldn't have been evidence of incendiaries, either. They burn hot and then go out in ~5 minutes, and would have cooled completely in a few hours. 'course facts don't mean much to truther nuts.

Another thing. What columns are they saying were supposedly "cut" to produce that "molten metal"? If it was the core columns, how did the "river" of "molten metal" from the core columns travel from the center core columns to and then out of the perimeter windows? How much molten metal do they think is produced in a thermite cut of a single column? Not to mention that the "molten metal" from the core columns would have fallen DOWN THE SHAFTS or pooled in the core proper.

Amazing logic these people have.

Amazing the lies agents will tell, then forget they told, then tell another with the opposite intent.

There was a time when you presented yourself as one that believed in demolition. I knew it was fake or the classic "false opposition" or a psyops effort ot appear as if you oppossd the same thing as a group of truthers so you could spread or support misinformation and contribute to disinformation.

I knew that when you couldn't provide a feasible explanation for how the charges were placed to cut the supposed columns to create free fall.

Here you are trying to assert that there were steel core columns when there is absolutely no independently verifiable evidence they existed, because now everyone knows they were demoed and the most important thing is to gate keep on the information that enables a feasible description of free fall.

Concrete can be easily fractured to fall freely with a small amount of explosives that are properly placed while steel cannot.

Aside from that, this page has some idiocy about lead being seen flowing out of WTC 2 windows. Lead is not red when it is molten, only steel is.

This, is the concrete core of WTC 2.

 

[eots]

I forgot about that. Thanks.

Yep, a big UPS system would easily have several tons of lead in it, and they would have been all over the towers and WTC 7, given the number of financial services tenants in there. To claim that the molten metal pouring out of one corner of WTC 2 before its collapse was evidence of a few columns melting is just plain ignorance. The molten metal in the debris two or three months later wouldn't have been evidence of incendiaries, either. They burn hot and then go out in ~5 minutes, and would have cooled completely in a few hours. 'course facts don't mean much to truther nuts.

Another thing. What columns are they saying were supposedly "cut" to produce that "molten metal"? If it was the core columns, how did the "river" of "molten metal" from the core columns travel from the center core columns to and then out of the perimeter windows? How much molten metal do they think is produced in a thermite cut of a single column? Not to mention that the "molten metal" from the core columns would have fallen DOWN THE SHAFTS or pooled in the core proper.

Amazing logic these people have.

two diffrent reports of molten metal...you are confused

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Can you explain why Les Robertson, the structural engineer of record for both towers, and every other structural engineer having anything to do with the design and construction of them, thinks your conspiracy theories are absurd? Here are accounts by prominent SE's, Matthys Levy, Gene Corley, Irwin Cantor, and Robertson:
911 Links - WTC Not a Demolition Index to Scenes
Why aren't they in your "truth movement," considering their superior knowledge of the subject?

Because they're all liars who work for the government and hate the constitution.

Toto is actually correct on this.All those people you mentioned are corrupt evil bastards who will do ANYTHING for money so to lie about this event menas diddly squat to them.Robertson initally wasnt like that but he they obviously got to him and bought him off to lie.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

right...so uneven damage and fire causes an even collapse how ?

What part of this study did they get wrong or what don't you agree with?
Google Image Result for http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/images/WTC7_column-79-Collapse.jpg

they ignored witness testimonys and supressed film footage dis in fo agent.

 

[Christophera]

Another thing. What columns are they saying were supposedly "cut" to produce that "molten metal"? If it was the core columns, how did the "river" of "molten metal" from the core columns travel from the center core columns to and then out of the perimeter windows? How much molten metal do they think is produced in a thermite cut of a single column? Not to mention that the "molten metal" from the core columns would have fallen DOWN THE SHAFTS or pooled in the core proper.

Amazing logic these people have.

You try to dismiss the significance of the molten steel flowing out of the east side of WTC 2. The concrete core kept any molten steel from going down the core so if there was thermite cutting going on of the interior box columns surrounding the core, it would have to go out.

Since thermite is liquid when burning it must be held up against a vertical surface of steel to melt through. What this does is make it necessary to involve more area to make sure the steel is severed.

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs_ogSbQFbM]YouTube - Eyes Wide Shut: Gross Negligence with NIST Denial of Molten Metal on 9/11[/ame]

there are several wtc engineers that witnessed and reported molten metal...right here

 

[Christophera]

Can you explain why Les Robertson, the structural engineer of record for both towers, and every other structural engineer having anything to do with the design and construction of them, thinks your conspiracy theories are absurd? Here are accounts by prominent SE's, Matthys Levy, Gene Corley, Irwin Cantor, and Robertson:
911 Links - WTC Not a Demolition Index to Scenes
Why aren't they in your "truth movement," considering their superior knowledge of the subject?

Because they're all liars who work for the government and hate the constitution.

Toto is actually correct on this.All those people you mentioned are corrupt evil bastards who will do ANYTHING for money so to lie about this event menas diddly squat to them.Robertson initally wasnt like that but he they obviously got to him and bought him off to lie.

I haven't heard any outright lies of Robertsons that were significant regarding the structure. When s. jones interviewed him, jones lie and Robertson let him lie and say the core columns existed. What he says about demo doesn't matter because there is no feasible explanation within the core of the FEMA lie, which is why it is so important to oppose the concrete and the psyops relating to the structure is so widespread.

If people new the true structure, the impact/fire lie would never fly.

 

[Gamolon]

right...so uneven damage and fire causes an even collapse how ?

What part of this study did they get wrong or what don't you agree with?
Google Image Result for http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/images/WTC7_column-79-Collapse.jpg

they ignored witness testimonys and supressed film footage dis in fo agent.

I thought you left with your tail between your legs?

Are you going to admit that you got your "steel temperature" information wrong or are you going to be another coward like Christophera?

 

[Gamolon]

YouTube - Eyes Wide Shut: Gross Negligence with NIST Denial of Molten Metal on 9/11

there are several wtc engineers that witnessed and reported molten metal...right here

Was type of "metal" was it confirmed to be? Aluminum is metal, lead is metal, and steel is metal? Which was it tested to be?

Or are you just ASSUMING it to be steel because it fits your zany theories?

 

[Gamolon]

Another thing. What columns are they saying were supposedly "cut" to produce that "molten metal"? If it was the core columns, how did the "river" of "molten metal" from the core columns travel from the center core columns to and then out of the perimeter windows? How much molten metal do they think is produced in a thermite cut of a single column? Not to mention that the "molten metal" from the core columns would have fallen DOWN THE SHAFTS or pooled in the core proper.

Amazing logic these people have.

You try to dismiss the significance of the molten steel flowing out of the east side of WTC 2. The concrete core kept any molten steel from going down the core so if there was thermite cutting going on of the interior box columns surrounding the core, it would have to go out.

Since thermite is liquid when burning it must be held up against a vertical surface of steel to melt through. What this does is make it necessary to involve more area to make sure the steel is severed.

What's the matter Chris? Nobody discussing your crackpot theory? We've all moved past that like all the other forums before this one.

Go over and argue with the folks at Mike Malloy's forum and get banned in about a month like everywhere else.