WTC-7 Was A Controlled Demolition Inside Job

[LA RAM FAN]

I remember reading that above a certain floor, but below the impact points, the steel was not fireproofed

Not true at all.the steel in fact after the 93 bombing, was reinforced even more so everywhere in the towers on all the steel with even MUCH more fireproofing than it ever had before the 93 bombing.see your confused because your making the mistake that too many other gullible people around here have made,listening to the lies and propaganda of the corporate controlled media.anybody who knows about them knows they never have an interest in the truth about major events like this.

The impact stripped away much of the fireproofing


fireproofing is not designed to resist such physical forces

again your buying into the lies of what the corporate controlled mainstream media has been telling you.

 

[JBeukema]

Look, he's back

hey, 911it...


how do you explain this?

 

[JBeukema]

Which burn hotter, coals or jet fuel?

 

[JBeukema]

Not true at all.the steel in fact after the 93 bombing, was reinforced even more so everywhere in the towers on all the steel with even MUCH more fireproofing than it ever had before the 93 bombing.see your confused because your making the mistake that too many other gullible people around here have made,listening to the lies and propaganda of the corporate controlled media.anybody who knows about them knows they never have an interest in the truth about major events like this.

The impact stripped away much of the fireproofing


fireproofing is not designed to resist such physical forces

again your buying into the lies of what the corporate controlled mainstream media has been telling you.

Again you swallow the load Alex Jones gives you

 

[LA RAM FAN]

by no one you would be speaking about yourself again,,right..

Robert Erickson,, emailed David Ray Griffin on 3/27/09:
"if Jones is surprised that we just placed bags of thermite around the column...what else would Jones have suggested? "

I was informed of the question above and I responded on 3/28/09 as follows:

Robert,

Bags of commercial thermite set against a steel column -- what a pathetic "experiment." Not anywhere close to representing my views, as you must know, from our discussion about the red/gray chips and the crucial distinction between ordinary thermite and super-thermite! What a terrible and unfair straw-man joke you are evidently trying to pull.

Why can't you get a sample of super-thermite? I think you can, if you will actually try. Or are you like NIST which refuses to look?




1. awards.lanl.gov...
[quoting]
Super-Thermite Electric Matches
Applications

The principal application is in the entertainment industry, which uses fireworks displays for a variety of venues, such as sporting events, holiday celebrations, and musical and theatrical gatherings. Secondary applications include

● triggering explosives for the mining, demolition, and defense industries,

2. Los Alamos National Lab: National Security Science...
"technologies and can be applied to a multitude of related products –anywhere
there is a need for sophisticated and accurate ignition control with lower risk of
misfire at lower cost. "
Development Stage:
Working prototype available for demonstration purposes.
Patent Status:
Patent pending Non-Provisional
Licensing Status:
LANL is seeking partners to help commercialize this product which is available
for exclusive or non-exclusive licensing. Contact:
Michael Erickson, 505-667-8087
[email protected]
[email protected]
Technology Transfer Division

I urge you to contact Mr. Erickson at LANL and request at least three "prototype" samples of super-thermite matches. Since his interest is in "commercializing", I would recommend telling him that you are doing a special which addresses super-thermite and that this will give his product "free advertising", or something like that... I emailed him several months ago, but I lacked an approach that would help with his "commercializing" the product, which was his interest. I think you could succeed if you tried.

Next, if you succeed in getting a few of the "super-thermite matches," I propose to send you the complete paper that we have -- which includes a discussion of these matches along with their potential usage on 9/11. I think that super-thermite "matches" of this type could very well have been used to trigger more conventional explosives such as C4 in the WTC buildings.

Next step would be experiments, well-founded and relevant experiments, such as:

1. Ask two independent laboratories to do SEM/EDS and DSC analyses as described in our paper on the super-thermite material contained in these matches. The results would then be compared carefully with those already obtained on red chips found in the WTC dust.
One of these labs could be BYU/Dr. Farrer if you wish, since he has analyzed the red chips found in the WTC dust and could act very quickly. (BYU requires that he be paid for any 9/11 research now.) Such analyses are worthy of scientific publication in a peer-reviewed journal (unlike placing bags of commercial thermite next to steel columns).

2. A real demonstration would involve a C4 shaped charge applied to a steel column, with the cutter charge ignited by a highly-reliable super-thermite match (in turn triggered using a remote radio signal).

These experiments would test my hypothesis.

Best wishes,
Steven Jones



Prof Jones Responds to National Geographic, page 1

jones is a fucking crackpot

I think the crack pot is you implying that there is not more advanced form of thermite or super thermite`

true enough.notice how he came back with things like -thermite doesnt explode and stuff like that.well both thermite and explosives were used.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The impact stripped away much of the fireproofing


fireproofing is not designed to resist such physical forces

again your buying into the lies of what the corporate controlled mainstream media has been telling you.

Again you swallow the load Alex Jones gives you

unlike the corporate controlled media that has a PROVEN history of lies and propaganda and NEVER looks at evidence in major events like this,Jones at least does THAT much.

seeing how your so ignorant about all this though, no sense in going any further with you on this cause this is all stuff you SHOULD know by now after all these years.

 

[JBeukema]

So... you can't tell me how a Katana was made?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Look, he's back

hey, 911it...


how do you explain this?

what the hell is all THAT about? a pic of a sword and the casing it goes into.Like thats really relevent here.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

So... you can't tell me how a Katana was made?

again how the hell is THAT releveant to explosives bringing doww the towers? I also see how you avoid that point about the corporate controlled media as well.great job there.you know how people know that the corporate controlled media has NO interest in reporting the truth abotu events like this? congress did an investigation into the CIA's activities in the 70's and through the freedom of information act,they discoverd documents that they have CIA plants everywhere.government office buildings,human rights activists groups,and ESPECIALLY mainstream media outlets such as the LA times.everytime I bring that point up though,like clockwork,you Bush dupes ignore that fact just like you conviently did just now.So why bother when your bringing up irrelevent material?lol

 

[JBeukema]

Still evading?


Tell me how Katanas were made. The coals don't get hot enough to soften steel. Even jet fuel can't do that!

 

[Liability]

Still evading?


Tell me how Katanas were made. The coals don't get hot enough to soften steel. Even jet fuel can't do that!

Yeah. It's almost like the tools used by blacksmiths!

JB has clearly and eloquently refuted some of the dopiest of the 9/11 Trufer sophistry by posting one picture.

(This doesn't happen a lot, but I have to give some props to JB. Nicely done!)

 

[Terral]

Hi JB:

Yep.... and did you notice that they refuse to discuss how swords are made or state just at what temperature steel starts to weaken?

Anyone moved by your 'sword argument' is not even paying attention and is STUPID 'and' is helping to make my case that the USA 'is' worthy of utter destruction (#9 = my Topic)! Your little sword represents 'a segment' of iron/steel completely separate from any 'steel-frame network.' JB is trying to compare a few pounds of steel to massive columns like this:

This red-iron box column includes steel sections that are four inches thick on each side 'and' this massive column was bolted and welded into a massive steel-framed network that allows any heat energy to be transported to 'cooler areas.' The next problem with JB's STUPID 'sword argument' is that swordsmiths utilize a furnace and a controlled environment to temper metals using optimum conditions. The Official Cover Story LIE says that massive girders, columns, beams and bar-joists were softened/melted from building fires that burn in the neighborhood of 800 to 1000 degrees 'and' for only about 20 minutes in any single location (Schwab/UL Lab Info).

Your next problem is that all WTC-7 columns and beams were encased in 2 to 3-hour fireproofing insulation (pic) and everyone knows for certain that JB's silly sword includes no fireproofing countermeasures. The next problem is that red-iron structural steel melts at 2800 degrees (link). Remember again that WTC-7 was struck my NO JETLINER 'and' all structural steel components were protected by the 'compartmentalization' of concrete slabs (horizontally) and masonry curtain walls (vertically). The short of a long story is that no building fires or debris could possibly 'sever' ALL WTC-7 COLUMNS AND BEAMS 'simultaneously,' unless Controlled Demolition was used by a professional Demolition Crew under the guidance of an experienced Demolition Supervisor. Period!!!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A&feature=player_embedded"]Watch The Short Clip Again[/ame]

Remember that a gigantic skyscraper like this . . .

. . . was transformed into a neat little pile like this . . .

. . . in 6.6 seconds. Now look at the sides of all the adjacent buildings to realize that WTC-7 collapsed CD-style 'straight down' into its own footprint! This CD Job was done by professionals and people who knew exactly what they were doing; and I 'do' (#3) know the difference. End of story . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[LA RAM FAN]

This was an interview that John Skilling the lead engineer of the towers did with Eric Nalder of The Seattle Times back in 93 after the 93 bombing. Skilling pretty much proves that the airliner and the fires could not have brought down the towers with his comments here.That explosives however,could bring them down.

Frank Demartini the onsite construction manager, also said when interviewed in jan 2001 for a special on the history channel called Modern Marvels that it was designed so that it could take MULTIPLE hits from airliners and the structure would still remain standing.of course this article will just fall on death ears.people here are in so much denial.




Twin Towers Engineered To Withstand Jet Collision
By Eric Nalder

Engineers had to consider every peril they could imagine when they designed the World Trade Center three decades ago because, at the time, the twin towers were of unprecedented size for structures made of steel and glass.

"We looked at every possible thing we could think of that could happen to the buildings, even to the extent of an airplane hitting the side," said John Skilling, head structural engineer. "However, back in those days people didn't think about terrorists very much."

Skilling, based in Seattle, is among the world's top structural engineers. He is responsible for much of Seattle's downtown skyline and for several of the world's tallest structures, including the Trade Center.

Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building, Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the impact of a Boeing 707.

"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there."

Skilling - a recognized expert in tall buildings - doesn't think a single 200-pound car bomb would topple or do major structural damage to a Trade Center tower. The supporting columns are closely spaced and even if several were disabled, the others would carry the load.

"However," he added, "I'm not saying that properly applied explosives - shaped explosives - of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage."

He took note of the fact that smoke and fire spread throughout the building yesterday. He said that is possibly because the pressurizing system that stops the spread of smoke didn't work when the electric power went off. Skilling, 72, was not involved in the design of the building mechanics.

Although Skilling is not an explosives expert, he says there are people who do know enough about building demolition to bring a structure like the Trade Center down.

"I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it."

Copyright (c) 1993 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Frank Demartini the onsite construction manager, also said when interviewed in jan 2001 for a special on the history channel called Modern Marvels that it was designed so that it could take MULTIPLE hits from airliners and the structure would still remain standing.

Oh well I guess if a construction manager said so... notice how wrong he was, yet you still take his advice!

Multiple hits, YES. Thousands of pounds of burning jet fuel , NO.

A stated numerous times, the steel didn't need to melt, only weaken to the point where it would collapse.

The terrorists themselves figured it would work and it did, no History Channel needed. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

 

[JBeukema]

We already told you what happened to the fireproofing and even Eots already called you out for your moronic claims about heat conducting heat instantly at the speed of light 'like electricity'

 

[JBeukema]

The next problem is that red-iron structural steel melts at 2800 degrees

Steel doesn't need to melt. I don't melt the steel to make a sword, either


first you claim it can conduct heat unhindered, then you claim that the concrete compartmentalizes it.

Make up your mind

 

[LA RAM FAN]

NIST has failed to disprove the controlled demolition hypothesis and clings to a gravity-assisted collapse hypothesis. This is a disservice to Americans and the world--as GROWING numbers of people doubt the 9/11 official myths.

The Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions:

1. Extremely rapid onset of “collapse”

2. Sounds of explosions at plane impact zone — a full second prior to collapse (heard by 118 first responders as well as by media reporters)

3. Observations of flashes (seen by numerous professionals)

4. Squibs, or “mistimed” explosions, 40 floors below the “collapsing” building seen in all the videos

5. Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust

6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds

7. Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves

8. Symmetrical collapse – through the path of greatest resistance – at nearly free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance

9. 1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris – outside of building footprint

10. Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away

11. Lateral ejection of thousands of individual 20 - 50 ton steel beams up to 500 feet

12. Total destruction of the building down to individual structural steel elements – obliterating the steel core structure.

13. Tons of molten Metal found by FDNY under all 3 high-rises (no other possible source other than an incendiary cutting charge such as Thermate)

14. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.

15. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

16. More than 1000 Bodies are unaccounted for — 700 tiny bone fragments found on top of nearby buildings

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations

2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)

3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”

Massive interlaced vertical columns of the North Tower are seen falling outward--their ends severed and glowing white--while streaming smoke from the ends. Gravity? Thermate? NIST admits to NOT TESTING any WTC debris for explosives/demolition residue. This amounts to criminal negligence--and underlies all the debate in this thread. Had NIST done its proper job--recognizing that there were over 500 eyewitness reports, many of which identified "explosions" which were NOT COINCIDENT with the planes crashing or the buildings collapsing. News footage reveals explosions. It took a Freedom of Information Act petition to get to these eyewitness testimonies about explosions--testimonies that were OMITTED from the 9/11 Commission Report.

WTC7 is the entry point for many who now know that the 9/11 Commission Report is a farce.....a coverup.

Many explosions occurred which are not coincident to the planes' crashes--before, after, and preceding the collapses. 9/11 Commission Report OMITS these.


Typical of many 9/11 "discussions" several participants here rely upon tactics of ridicule rather than intelligent debate with evidence. When you finally awake to who you have been, you will be horrified at what you have done.
__________________
Our government wouldn't lie about 9/11. Or would they? [ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=NWwrEEP8EBk]YouTube - Oklahoma City Bombing RARE footage[/ame]

 

[JBeukema]

Although Skilling is not an explosives expert

-you cite him as your expert witness

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Although Skilling is not an explosives expert

-you cite him as your expert witness

AE911Truth

like you 9/11 apologists ALWAYS do,you only read PARTS of posts since you only see what you WANT to see.you proved that here by just quoting PART of the post instead of the ENTIRE thing.LOl you obviously missed it where he pretty much made it clear that he made that comment because he knew people in demolitions and from his talks with THEM,he got his information from them that the towers could be brought down by explosives.but then again,testimony of demolition experts means not a thing to you.LOL.

here is ANOTHER one for you with at least hundreds of architects and engineers who dont accept the official version either.guess thats not good enough for you or the fact that David Ray Griffith in his DEBUNKING THE 9/11 DEBUNKING book,unlike the 9/11 commission report,lists his sources like I gave from the seattle times on Skilling and sources of demolition experts saying those towers could not have fallen down like they did unless it was because of controlled demolitions.of course thats not good enough for you either though.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

We already told you what happened to the fireproofing and even Eots already called you out for your moronic claims about heat conducting heat instantly at the speed of light 'like electricity'

uh Eots posted the video for you to watch where Kevin Ryan talked about the towers being reinforced with fireproofing after the 93 bombing liar.Not our fault you wont watch it.