Rising fascism in the US

Answer my questions (including the planes) now or **** off forever.

They are a diversion. Admittedly, a very powerful one. Let's let's try moving backwards.

WTC7 fell at free fall speed. Not possible in a gravity collapse.

WTCs 1 & 2 accelerated throughout their fall. Not possible according to the laws of physics.

There was molten steel,[2,800F] molten iron, [about the same] molten molybdenum, [4,750F] vaporized steel found at all WTC sites, from WTCs 1, 2 and 7.

The alleged hijackers only had jet fuel and office furnishings [maximum 1,800 F]

Where did the fuel come from to cause the melting, to turn these metals into a molten state?

=============

September 12, 2001-February 2002: Witnesses See Molten Metal in the Remains at Ground ZeroEdit event
A chunk of hot metal being removed from the North Tower rubble about eight weeks after 9/11.
A chunk of hot metal being removed from the North Tower rubble about eight weeks after 9/11. [Source: Frank Silecchia]
In the weeks and months after 9/11, numerous individuals report seeing molten metal in the remains of the World Trade Center:
bullet Ken Holden, who is involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation, and debris removal operations at Ground Zero, will later tell the 9/11 Commission, “Underground, it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from [WTC] Building 6.” [9/11 COMMISSION, 4/1/2003]
bullet William Langewiesche, the only journalist to have unrestricted access to Ground Zero during the cleanup operation, will describe, “n the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.” [LANGEWIESCHE, 2002, PP. 32]
bullet Leslie Robertson, one of the structural engineers responsible for the design of the WTC, describes fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks. [SEAU NEWS, 10/2001 pdf file]
bullet Alison Geyh, who heads a team of scientists studying the potential health effects of 9/11, reports: “Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel.” [JOHNS HOPKINS PUBLIC HEALTH MAGAZINE, 2001]
bullet Ron Burger, a public health advisor who arrives at Ground Zero on September 12, says that “feeling the heat” and “seeing the molten steel” there reminds him of a volcano. [NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION, 9/2003, PP. 40 pdf file]
bullet Paramedic Lee Turner arrives at the World Trade Center site on September 12 as a member of a federal urban search and rescue squad. While at Ground Zero, he goes “down crumpled stairwells to the subway, five levels below ground.” There, he reportedly sees, “in the darkness a distant, pinkish glow—molten metal dripping from a beam.” [US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT, 9/12/2002]
bullet According to a member of New York Air National Guard’s 109th Air Wing, who is at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6: “One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers’ remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots.” [NATIONAL GUARD MAGAZINE, 12/2001]
bullet New York firefighters will recall “heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel.” [NEW YORK POST, 3/3/2004]
bullet As late as five months after the attacks, in February 2002, firefighter Joe O’Toole sees a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, “was dripping from the molten steel.” [KNIGHT RIDDER, 5/29/2002]
Steven E. Jones, a physics professor from Utah, will claim this molten metal is “direct evidence for the use of high-temperature explosives, such as thermite,” used to deliberately bring down the WTC towers. [MSNBC, 11/16/2005] He will say that without explosives, a falling building would have “insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal.” [DESERET MORNING NEWS, 11/10/2005] There will be no mention whatsoever of the molten metal in the official reports by FEMA, NIST, or the 9/11 Commission. [FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, 5/1/2002; 9/11 COMMISSION, 7/24/2004; NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY, 9/2005] But Dr. Frank Gayle, who leads the steel forensics aspects of NIST’s investigation of the WTC collapses, will be quoted as saying: “Your gut reaction would be the jet fuel is what made the fire so very intense, a lot of people figured that’s what melted the steel. Indeed it didn’t, the steel did not melt.” [ABC NEWS 7 (NEW YORK), 2/7/2004] As well as the reports of molten metal, data collected by NASA in the days after 9/11 finds dozens of “hot spots” (some over 1,300 degrees) at Ground Zero (see September 16-23, 2001).

http://historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=leslie_robertson

=============

John Gross (NIST) Telling Lies About Molten Steel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd2oG5QeK0Q

Why use the planes as a divertion? Who piloted them? Because whoever did that committed suicide that day. Are CIA operatives likely to sacrifice for the cause like that? No, they aren't.

Your theory doesn't hold water. If the CIA wanted to bring down the towers by explosive, it didn't need the planes. Blame the thermites on AQ if you need to, but why the darn 4 planes?

Focus on the molten steel, molten molybdenum, vaporized steel, the nanothermite, the free fall collapse of WTC7, the list is long.

None of these things are possible given the official story but all of them are real.

The alleged hijackers only had jet fuel which as you know cannot melt steel or Mo.

With these impossibilities present, the entire official story falls apart. The 19 Arabs were framed. Who can possibly know of the veracity of any of the rest of the official conspiracy theory.

Why AQ?

There is no impossibility there. Jet fuel can perfectly make a steel beam red hot. How do you think they melt iron ore if not with fossil fuels? You know **** about physics.

Focus on the planes. They were real. And their presence means your theory is baloony. If the CIA framed AQ, then their job is done. What's the point in bringing down the WTC with termites? err sorry thermites.

Of, and you still haven't been able to define that word, which you use all over the place... Ergo you have no clue what you're talking about.

There wasn't any chance to concentrate the heat from the jet fuel onto any particular steel component to make it red hot. They melt iron ore, which is ground down to powders and melted in blast furnaces, a completely different thing from steel columns and beams that are massive in size and weight. Steel that is covered by fireproofing material.



Let's allow that they were real. Let's allow that the hijackers were on the planes.

Let's allow that the hijackers brought only jet fuel and office furnishings. That can't explain the molten steel, the vaporized steel, the molten molybdenum, the nanothermite found in abundance at WTC.

The abundance, just the presence of these molten metals means that the alleged hijackers could not have caused the COLLAPSE of the WTC towers.

That WTC7 fell at free fall speed means that the alleged hijackers could not have caused the COLLAPSE of WTC7.

That WTCs 1 and 2 both fell at accelerating speed means that the alleged hijackers could not have caused the COLLAPSE of the WTC towers 1 & 2.

Free fall, accelerating speed, the symmetry of the collapses mean that the alleged hijackers could not have caused the three collapses.

Asymmetric damage causes asymmetric collapses. You can see this in the fires on the Windsor Tower, the Delphi [sp?] Building

========
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade
Center Catastrophe
Niels H. Harrit*,1, Jeffrey Farrer2
, Steven E. Jones*,3, Kevin R. Ryan4
, Frank M. Legge5
,
Daniel Farnsworth2
, Gregg Roberts6
, James R. Gourley7
and Bradley R. Larsen3
1
Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
2
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA
3
S&J Scientific Co., Provo, UT, 84606, USA
4
9/11 Working Group of Bloomington, Bloomington, IN 47401, USA
5
Logical Systems Consulting, Perth, Western Australia
6
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA
7
International Center for 9/11 Studies, Dallas, TX 75231, USA
Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the
destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in
this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan
resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy
dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately
100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation
of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum
are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring
at approximately 430 ˚C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich
spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these
chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.

http://www2.ae911truth.org/downloads/Full_Thermite_paper.pdf

---------------

Point TT-6: The Claim that There Was No Molten Steel or Iron in the WTC
Point TT-6: Buildings

Introduction
According to the official account, the Twin Towers were brought down by airplane impacts and fire, and in the case of WTC 7, by fire alone. One implication of this account is that the destruction would have produced no molten steel or molten iron (which is produced in a thermite reaction). Structural steel does not begin to melt until it reaches about 1,482°C (2,700°F), and iron does not melt until it reaches 1,538°C (2,800°F). [1] The fires ignited by the plane crashes, even with the help of jet fuel, could not have been hotter than 1,000°C (1,832°F), meaning that they would have been at least 1000 degrees F. cooler than what would be necessary to melt steel/iron. The presence of molten steel or iron, therefore, would have implied that the building steel had been melted by something other than the airplane impacts and the resulting fires.

...

The evidence of molten steel or iron cannot be called “irrelevant,” given the fact that the building fires, as NIST pointed out, cannot explain it. The only explanation NIST suggested was that, if there was molten steel or iron, it would have been “due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile.” But NIST claimed that the buildings were brought down by building fires, which at most could have reached 1,000°C (1,832°F.) So the idea that burning debris from these buildings could have reached anywhere close to the temperature needed to melt structural steel (1,482°C, 2,700°F), [11] without the help of explosive or incendiary material, is implausible.
It is also unscientific.

http://www.consensus911.org/point-tt-6/

Your understanding of metallurgy and structural engineering is seriously deficient, though you appear to be uninhibited by your ignorance.

The WTC buildings were a rare design choice for tall structures, a monocoque structures in which the external skin or walls of the buiildings (made of structural steel) were the principal structural components for bearing the torsion, bending and compressive loads of the structure, a technique common in aircraft design , but rare for tall buildings. This choice provided economic benefits by eliminating the internal structural columns and thereby providing added continuous office space. However it left the towers exposed to catastrophic failure such as occurred on 9/11.

The poured concrete floors were supported by relatively light steel frame supports coated in, what was later determined to be inadequate, thermal insulation. The initial impacts of the heavily loaded aircraft pierced the external supporting structure, while the fires from the aircraft, fully loaded with fuel for transcontinental flights eventually weakened the adjacent steel frame floor supports, resulting in a cascading failure of floors, failing and gaining momentum in sequence as they fell. Extensive engineering analysis was performed after the event and the failure mode outline above was confirmed beyond doubt or question.

This was the second attempt by Al Quaeda to bring down the WTC: the first occurred in 1993 when a bomb-laden truck was parked adjacent to a structural footing in the underground parking area of the North WTC tower, with the evident intent of causing theat tower to fall on its companion bringing both down. The proximity and strength od the detonation was inadequate to do the planned job, but six deaths and over a thousand injuries resulted. Evidently the plotters dod some extensive homework in the following years.

Bad start, George. Instead of telling everyone how poor my understanding is, show them, in an honest fashion.



Your opening sentence, and you start with a fabrication. Hardly an auspicious beginning. You can't have researched this very much or you would realize that I have provided numerous professional sources to back up everything that I have advanced.

If I hadn't the "scientists" would have been all over me, for the science. All they have done is personal attacks. Which is what yours also is. Can I expect better of you?

Please provide sources to substantiate these half-truths, fantasies and lies.

To help you out, to lessen your homework assignment, you can forget about researching this fabrication, above.

-------------
"However, NIST’s detailed quantitative report, Computer Simulation of the Fires, reveals that on impact with the Towers, Flight 11 and Flight 175 were respectively carrying only approximately 36% and 31% of full fuel capacity."

http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/e/VisualizationAidsWTCTowers.pdf

-----------

I don't want to burden you too much, but how do you explain the molten steel, the vaporized steel, the molten molybdenum?

Both aircraft had taken off from East Coast airports on scheduled 5+ hour flights to West Coast destinations. Unless they dumped fuel during their brief flights both aircraft carried much nore fuel than your allegedly "scientific" study claims.

You are merely an ill informed loonie pursuing some fantasy theory, and aren't worth the time or trouble. Piss off.

I'm at a loss for words, George. These estimates of the amount of fuel came from FEMA and NIST.

If you have something to add that shows these estimates are wrong, I'm all ears.

1. you still haven't explained the role played by the planes in your little theory.

2. Your article on t(h)ermites speaks only of alumium and iron oxyde (as already explained to you way back) two materials which could easily have been the result of the plane (made of aluminium) crashing into a steel frame.

Yes, I have. Even allowing that that planes portion is completely true doesn't explain how steel was melted and vaporized, how molybdenum, 4,750F melting point was melted by the only fuel the alleged hijackers brought, jet fuel, can only reach 1,800F, in ideal burn conditions.

It doesn't explain how WTC7 fell at free fall speed, unnoticed by legions of government scientists charged with doing a full, unbiased study.

It doesn't explain how the alleged hijackers were able to cause WTC7 to fall at free fall speed when they and their "planes" didn't come anywhere close to that tower.

It doesn't explain the impossibly low chance of three steel frame towers all collapsing at free fall and increasing acceleration when no other steel frame building has ever done so, before or since.

If China or Russia had tried to pull off a scam like this they would have been laughed off the planet.

It doesn't explain how WTCs 1 & 2 fell with increasing speed in their descent. No jolts. Impossible in a gravity collapse. Look at all the actual gravity collapses from earthquakes

Your pages-long diversion from the topic of this thread is an obvious, indulgent example of trolling. I've noticed other members on other threads complaining to you about this practice.

I've had requests to attend to the thread topic or leave a thread when my conversation deviated from the topic. In this community, members generally follow these rules. I'm asking you to do the same. If you make the decision to disregard my request as I've seen you do previously, I direct you to the TOS and will pre-warn you that I'll take your instances of intentional trolling to admin to remove you.

Have you directed this to all the others who have also, are discussing these issues?

Is this not a good example of "Rising fascism in the US", attempting to quell honest, scientific inquiry?

Are not the ludicrous fantasies woven by the US government/911Commission/NIST reports/... all excellent examples of "Rising fascism in the US"?

Are not the myriad wars and mostly successful attempts to oust numerous sovereign governments a prime example of "Actual fascism in the US"?

I'm unwilling to discuss this further with you. You've littered several threads with this same tired topic, evidence that your distractions are intentionally disruptive.

Take your towers elsewhere. Respect members enough not to open unrelated topics in their threads.

One more post from you belaboring this point will result in my best efforts to have you banned.

Behave and enjoy.

Then let's discuss the Rising fascism in the US issues I have raised.

Isn't it exactly how fascism took hold in Germany, to deny things that were absolute truths, to demonized groups of people, all in order to wage illegal wars? Isn't this how things have been, how things have gone since 2001?

Okay, Olivier, george, have you wondered why Lash didn't address you?

Let's go to,

https://able2know.org/topic/369947-9

Only those things that are pertinent to "Rising fascism in the US", like the issues I have raised with Lash in my last reply.