[W:57: 1585]Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.

[gamolon]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

You can see evidence of this in the antenna movement coupled with observation of the North face at initiation, where the destruction does not extend to the corner 2 way zones......

YouTube

What visual clues in the video are leading you to make the statement that "destruction does not extend to the corner 2 way zones?"

 

[SanderO]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

The staged events of 911 encouraged many patriotic men to join in the Global War On Terror, including my fine young nephew and Pat Tillman. My nephew is still in one piece, but Pat Tillman was sacrificed at the altar of that bull**** war.

Aside from being "the cause" for the hoax of the war, there were other goals accomplished too, especially by the murder at the Pentagon and destruction of records there. The SEC invoked a rule never used before, and US securities were cleared without any identification papers. Those were related to Project Hammer, essentially the same project that put our man Yeltsin into power in Russia.

Some of us came to realize we were deceived by the government and media misinformation efforts, but some not. C'est la vie.

They were not staged...

Do you think terrorism exists? Was the recent terrorism attack in Pakistan a staged event or real terrorism?

Truthers love the idea of a fake.... or what the call false flag. It's not unheard or to "frame up someone else" so you as the criminal goes unpunished and someone else gets the wrap.

911 was not stage and it was not a false flag. It was terrorism a tactic seen in the ME... suicide terrorists... What is the cause of ME terrorism? Basically oppression and exploitation by a powerless group by a powerful group or state. The oppressed don't have armies... jets and so on. They wage asymmetrical warfare... and in the case of the USA, UK and France they are being attacked for what they did when they interfered in the ME... it's more than a century I think. When people see they have no recourse to address their grievances... they strike out using violence and terrorism.

 

[gamolon]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

gerrycan, can you please address these two statements? How can you say that the shaded red areas are where the core failed, but then say the the columns "501, 508, 1001, 1008 and perhaps some adjacent columns" were NOT destroyed. These two posts contradict one another which is why I'm asking for further explanation.

Please disregard. I see what you are explaining now. Thanks.

I am still wondering about my query in post #1251 above though.

 

[gamolon]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

My suggestion is that the damage/failures in the core PROGRESSED from the region of initially plane destroyed columns. Obviously the initial core damage was no sufficient to initiate the collapse. That would come when the core's capacity had fallen too low as a result of additional columns in the center failing/non performing. YES the four corners were the LAST surviving columns in my understanding. The mechanism driving the failures was HEAT from fires.
conceptually not literally it was like this:

pre plane strike

X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X

plane strike

X X X X X X
X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X

plane strike +/- 30 minutes

X X X X
X X X X
X X
X X X X
X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X

plane strike +/- 60 minutes

X X X X
X X

X X
X X X X
X X X X X

collapse

X X X X
X X


X X
X X X X

SanderO,

I am assuming that the layout with the "Xs" is a plan view of the core with each "X" representing a core column?

 

[SanderO]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

SanderO,

I am assuming that the layout with the "Xs" is a plan view of the core with each "X" representing a core column?

The spaces were lost... so it's the number of columns... but their location is in accurate... you would have to arrange them Xs... columns... symmetrically around a vertical line between the 4 and the columns of Xs

DRAWING.... MORE OR LESS

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

They were not staged...

Do you think terrorism exists? Was the recent terrorism attack in Pakistan a staged event or real terrorism?

Truthers love the idea of a fake.... or what the call false flag. It's not unheard or to "frame up someone else" so you as the criminal goes unpunished and someone else gets the wrap.

911 was not stage and it was not a false flag. It was terrorism a tactic seen in the ME... suicide terrorists... What is the cause of ME terrorism? Basically oppression and exploitation by a powerless group by a powerful group or state. The oppressed don't have armies... jets and so on. They wage asymmetrical warfare... and in the case of the USA, UK and France they are being attacked for what they did when they interfered in the ME... it's more than a century I think. When people see they have no recourse to address their grievances... they strike out using violence and terrorism.

You are most credulous sir.

 

[SanderO]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

You are most credulous sir.

But you did not respond to the question.

Does terrorism exist... as a tactic of non state actors against a powerful state?

If you answer that terrorism exists... can you name some terrorist incidents?

Bombing of the King David Hotel? yes or no?
Charlie Hebdo attacks? yes or no?
1993 WTC bombing? yes or no?
Attack at the Berlin Olympics? yes or no?
Attack of the Cole? yes or no?

=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_Great_Britain - terrorist attacks or false flags>=? yes or no?

What is the main tactic of guerrilla warfare?

"Over the centuries the practitioners of guerrilla warfare have been called rebels, irregulars, insurgents, partisans, and mercenaries. Frustrated military commanders have consistently damned them as barbarians, savages, terrorists, brigands, outlaws, and bandits."

Why are guerrillas called terrorists?

 

[gamolon]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

The spaces were lost... so it's the number of columns... but their location is in accurate... you would have to arrange them Xs... columns... symmetrically around a vertical line between the 4 and the columns of Xs

DRAWING.... MORE OR LESS

Thank you.

I think this addresses gerrycan's quote below. Still not sure what he means by "the core destruction did not extend to columns 501, 508, 1001, 1008". Is he saying this because he perceives the middle of the north face perimeter facade moves downward just before the rest of the perimeter facade?

The core destruction did not extend to columns 501, 508, 1001, and 1008 and perhaps those adjacent to each of those cores at the perimeter too. I certainly cannot for the life of me explain how the damage and subsequent fire could possibly cause this pattern of destruction, but feel free to try and shed some light on that if you wish.

 

[SanderO]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Thank you.

I think this addresses gerrycan's quote below. Still not sure what he means by "the core destruction did not extend to columns 501, 508, 1001, 1008". Is he saying this because he perceives the middle of the north face perimeter facade moves downward just before the rest of the perimeter facade?

The OOS flooring was supported by a heft belt girder which was cantilevered off the perimeter core columns. The OOS floor loads (trusses) were transferred to the girder and the girder in turn transferred those loads to the 24 perimeter core columns. Clearly the belt girders would fail if they columns which supported them failed.... And that's what happened and led to the floor slabs having no core side support so the caved inward toward to core.. and this became the ROOSD mass. The square donut floors could not be supported simply by the facade columns. If that were the case.. no core columns would be needed except to create elevator shafts.

 

[MrBig2430]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Other engineers have put forth explanations which are a better fit to the observations of the collapses.

.

1- who would these ‘other engineers’ be?

2- how are you qualified to decide this?

 

[mike2810]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

1- who would these ‘other engineers’ be?

2- how are you qualified to decide this?

What evidence do you have that 9/11 was an inside job?
What are your qualifications to decide SanderO is wrong.

Besides SanderO has made in clear what is quals are and what he posts is his opinion. An opinion based on his research and knowledge.

You may want to read through the thread.

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

But you did not respond to the question.

Does terrorism exist... as a tactic of non state actors against a powerful state?

If you answer that terrorism exists... can you name some terrorist incidents?

Bombing of the King David Hotel? yes or no?
Charlie Hebdo attacks? yes or no?
1993 WTC bombing? yes or no?
Attack at the Berlin Olympics? yes or no?
Attack of the Cole? yes or no?

=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_Great_Britain - terrorist attacks or false flags>=? yes or no?

What is the main tactic of guerrilla warfare?

"Over the centuries the practitioners of guerrilla warfare have been called rebels, irregulars, insurgents, partisans, and mercenaries. Frustrated military commanders have consistently damned them as barbarians, savages, terrorists, brigands, outlaws, and bandits."

Why are guerrillas called terrorists?

Stupid questions deserve no answer Geoffrey. You are a credulous, if good-hearted, person.

 

[gamolon]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

The OOS flooring was supported by a heft belt girder which was cantilevered off the perimeter core columns. The OOS floor loads (trusses) were transferred to the girder and the girder in turn transferred those loads to the 24 perimeter core columns. Clearly the belt girders would fail if they columns which supported them failed.... And that's what happened and led to the floor slabs having no core side support so the caved inward toward to core.. and this became the ROOSD mass. The square donut floors could not be supported simply by the facade columns. If that were the case.. no core columns would be needed except to create elevator shafts.

I get that, but I'm wondering how gerrycan is able to determine that the 4 corner core columns, 501, 508, 1001, 1008 and possible adjacent columns did NOT fail per the last sentence in his post below (in red). He posted a video showing a zoomed in view of the north face perimeter facade as it failed as supporting evidence. How does that video support his claim?

The core failed in the areas shaded red below. Perhaps a slightly smaller area.
View attachment 67250509

You can see evidence of this in the antenna movement coupled with observation of the North face at initiation, where the destruction does not extend to the corner 2 way zones......

YouTube

The core destruction did not extend to columns 501, 508, 1001, and 1008 and perhaps those adjacent to each of those cores at the perimeter too. I certainly cannot for the life of me explain how the damage and subsequent fire could possibly cause this pattern of destruction, but feel free to try and shed some light on that if you wish.

Below are where the four perimeter core columns are located (circled in red). The zoomed facade area in the video is in the green box.

 

[MrBig2430]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

What evidence do you have that 9/11 was an inside job?

Lmao. You’re not too bright, are you?

Sander claims that ‘other engineers ‘ have put forth an explanation that is better than NIST’s regarding the towers.

I’m not aware of This. Other explanations have been put forth for 7. By engineers.

Btw, 9/11 wasn’t an inside job

But sander is an idiot.

What are your qualifications to decide SanderO is wrong.

He’s nearly always wrong. He’s the Stundie of debunkers.

Besides SanderO has made in clear what is quals are and what he posts is his opinion. An opinion based on his research and knowledge.

You may want to read through the thread.

He also freely posts that he’s never read any NIST report cuz he doesn’t have the mental capacity. He freely admits that he has no firm grasp on what they say cuz he hasn’t studied them.

He has ‘some’ qualifications, agreed. But he also displays an arrogance about his opinions that I find hard to keep quiet about. Especially when he demonstrates his lack of hnowledge.

A classic case of Dunning-Krueger Syndrome

 

[mike2810]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Lmao. You’re not too bright, are you?

Sander claims that ‘other engineers ‘ have put forth an explanation that is better than NIST’s regarding the towers.

I’m not aware of This. Other explanations have been put forth for 7. By engineers.

Btw, 9/11 wasn’t an inside job

But sander is an idiot.



He’s nearly always wrong. He’s the Stundie of debunkers.



He also freely posts that he’s never read any NIST report cuz he doesn’t have the mental capacity. He freely admits that he has no firm grasp on what they say cuz he hasn’t studied them.

He has ‘some’ qualifications, agreed. But he also displays an arrogance about his opinions that I find hard to keep quiet about. Especially when he demonstrates his lack of hnowledge.

A classic case of Dunning-Krueger Syndrome

One. Why the name calling?
Two. SanderO has his explanation based on much of the evidence found by the investigation done by various govt. organizations.
Three. Even NIST states there conclusions is what they came up with as most probable. Even NIST does not say with 100% that the failure occurred they way its reported.
Four. I have stated many times that no one can no the exact damage done by the crash into the towers. Nor can anyone know exactly how the fires spread in WTC1,2,7.
Why, no one was inside who lived to witness the damage.

NIST did the best it could under the time frame they had. I do accept they were correct that it was the crash damage/resulting fires that took WTC1,2 down. The exact sequence of failure may never be known.

FYI: you did not really provide answers to my questions.
"He’s nearly always wrong. He’s the Stundie of debunkers." Does not state or prove YOUR qualification. All we know is your a DP poster.

Just out of curiosity what do you think of gerrycan and Thoreau72 qualifications and posts?

 

[gamolon]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Sander claims that ‘other engineers ‘ have put forth an explanation that is better than NIST’s regarding the towers.

I’m not aware of This. Other explanations have been put forth for 7. By engineers.

Maybe engineers at the forum mentioned below? Not sure to whom he is referring though.

For the towers the ROOSD explanation presented at the 911 Free Forum is a much better fit for the collapse phase.

 

[SanderO]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Lmao. You’re not too bright, are you?

Sander claims that ‘other engineers ‘ have put forth an explanation that is better than NIST’s regarding the towers.

I’m not aware of This. Other explanations have been put forth for 7. By engineers.

Btw, 9/11 wasn’t an inside job

But sander is an idiot.

He’s nearly always wrong. He’s the Stundie of debunkers.

He also freely posts that he’s never read any NIST report cuz he doesn’t have the mental capacity. He freely admits that he has no firm grasp on what they say cuz he hasn’t studied them.

He has ‘some’ qualifications, agreed. But he also displays an arrogance about his opinions that I find hard to keep quiet about. Especially when he demonstrates his lack of hnowledge.

A classic case of Dunning-Krueger Syndrome

Mr Big(shot)

I have read a lot of the NIST reports.. I have not studied them in detail nor committed them to memory. I am well aware of the contents.

I am not defending NIST's work. They can defend their own work.

I am not a debunker either. I may point out that a statement made is incorrect or unsubstantiated or complete speculation.

I am an architect since I graduated in 1971. I worked for the architects of the WTC as my first job. I don't work in steel framed high rises. My understanding of structure is not unlike most architects. We employ or work with engineers who engineer the project.

Any presentation which requires extensive engineering calculations I do not examine.

My own explanations which are educated guesses and not offered as proofs of what happened are all derived from some basic concepts:

Structural failures which involve the total disintegration of the building/structure are ALWAYS progressive in nature, unless a huge bomb explodes the axial support at the base.

As structural failures progress the remaining structure will carry the loads of the failed elements. This is possible as structural elements have a factor of safety and can carry loads exceeding their design load in the range of 50% excess (this is a variable).

Heat will cause loss of capacity and will also expand steel elements

Connections are prone to incremental failure

Any explanation must consider or match the observed motion (all observations)

Any explanation must consider the structural design and its attributes.

If you don't like what I present... fine. Present your own explanations. "inside job" is not an explanation . CD is not an explanation. False flag is not an explanation.

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

For the simple mind, there is only one "explanation", and the government has a monopoly on it--the official conspiracy theory.

 

[Quag]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

For the simple mind, there is only one "explanation", and the government has a monopoly on it--the official conspiracy theory.

True the simple mind always has one explanation
THE EBIL US GOVT DID IT!!!!

HD running from reality since 2001

 

[mike2810]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

For the simpler mind there are multiple explanations. AE911T, Veterans Today, Prager, ect. have a hold them what to believe. They know anything will be believed if its is anti official report.

Still waiting for the evidence of "inside job".

Mark Basile's study is 5+ years over due.
Dr. Hulsey study may be done but AE911T wants more donations before its released.
Objective investigation at its finest.:lamo

 

[SanderO]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

For the simple mind, there is only one "explanation", and the government has a monopoly on it--the official conspiracy theory.

It depends on what *explanation* refers to.

Most *free lance* (not under USG contract) accept that there were hijacked planes which it the towers and this was not a false flag.

NIST has offered on set of explanations for the collapse of the towers. The *free lancers* have generated different explanations for how the collapse proceed post plane strike for the twin towers... and there are several explanations for the collapse of 7wtc.

For the non *truther* side there is no consensus and there will likely be other explanations and differing details explaining the collapses.

 

[ClintonServer]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Have you considered examining the facts and evidence that support and corroborate the official story?

What sort of knowledge or experience did you have with cell phones using 2001 technology? Did you know that it was 2008 before the cell phone system went from analog to digital? How much experience did you have with cell phones prior to that? Do you understand the limitations of the earlier system?

You are only the second person I ever heard tell me this . I am amazed. The First person was a Private Jet Pilot , he flew around celebs like Jack Nicholson , He also was my neighbour. He knew I was big into investigating this . He refused to give me his oppinion but would only make the same comment you did.

I do presume you referring too that cell phones could not be used up in the air ??? if not dis regard my post .

 

[ClintonServer]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

If your read the first 5 post the thread is already drifting away from the OP topic.

No one has ever provide a clear concise alternative explanation for 9/11. The position of "truthers" is the "official" explanation is wrong. Truthers will rarely state another truther is wrong. What we are to believe is all the other explanations are correct.

So "Truthers", provide the one clear concise alternative explanation with sources to prove it. Back to the OP, please prove 9/11 was an inside job. Provide your sources.

On your thought all we need is Police to convict someone , no need for a Court and Jury . In other words , No investigation solves everything , you go where the facts lead you and then provide them to a Jury.

In this case , in the history of Brick and Mortar buildings that are on fire never fall. (particularly bldg 7 ) That is enough proof for me , when couple with declassified documents about operation Northwoods.

Most Religious People for example can not understand why some folks refuse to believe.

Once the AVG Scared American can wrap their head around that Governments are in fact evil , the rest is not so hard to swallow. (read Northwoods)

also world war 2 Japanese American <----------- Internment camps , when they needed their rights the most.

The Problem is People do not want to believe these evil things can happen. Well I just am getting started of Proof of our History . So Who is the Nut Job Now ???

 

[ClintonServer]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

There never are.

You Can Not Teach Stupid

 

[ClintonServer]

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

I'll provide evidence it wasn't an inside job, if you want...

When ??????????????????/:2wave: