The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Linh Dinh ArchiveBlogview
Trump and 9/11
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

On 9/11/2001, Donald Trump did a live phone interview with New York’s WWOR. Digging this up 15 years later, Politico and Mother Jones pointed out how Trump bragged about the new status of his 71-story Trump Tower, “40 Wall Street actually was the second-tallest building in downtown Manhattan, and it was actually, before the World Trade Center, was the tallest—and then, when they built the World Trade Center, it became known as the second-tallest. And now it’s the tallest.”

It was a small dig at Trump’s huge vanity. A much more interesting bit from the interview was passed over, however. TruthMakesPeace finally broadcast it on 9/16/16. Trump:

“It wasn’t architectural defect. The WorldTradeCenter was always known as a very, very strong building. Don’t forget that took a big bomb in the basement [in 1993]. Now, the basement is the most vulnerable place because that’s your foundation, and it withstood that, and I got to see that area about three or four days after it took place because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour, because he did the building, and I said, ‘I can’t believe it.’ The building was standing solid and half of the columns were blown out, so this was an unbelievably powerful building. If you don’t know anything about structure, it was one of the first buildings that was built from the outside. The steel, the reason the WorldTradeCenter had such narrow windows is that in between all the windows, you had the steel on the outside, so you had the steel on the outside of the building. That’s why when I first looked, and you had these big heavy I-beams, when I first looked at it, I couldn’t believe it because there was a hole in the steel, and this is steel that was… You remember the width of the windows of the WorldTradeCenter, folks. I think you know if you were ever up there, they were quite narrow and in between was this heavy steel. I said how could a plane, even a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this steel? I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously, because I just can’t imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most buildings are built with the steel on the inside around the elevator shaft. This one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have, and it was almost just like a can of soup.

“I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel. I think, obviously, they were very big planes. They were going very rapidly, because I was also watching where the plane seemed to be not only going fast, it seemed to be coming down into the building. So it’s getting the speed from going down hill, so to speak. It just seemed to me that to do that kind of destruction is even more than a big plane, because you’re talking about taking out steel, the heaviest caliber steel that was used on the building. Well, these buildings were rock-solid, and you know it’s just an amazing, amazing thing. This country is different today and it’s going to be different than it ever was for many years to come.”

ORDER IT NOW

Since there was no official version of what had happened, Trump was not refuting anything, but merely giving his seasoned opinions based on two decades of overseeing skyscrapers being built. Knowing the TwinTowers, Trump couldn’t believe a plane could pierce them, much less brought them down.

Though Trump the builder gave us a frank take on 9/11, Trump the politician has gone full retard with the official version that 19 Muslims somehow did it. More tellingly, the mainstream media have not pressed Trump on this discrepancy. The reason should be obvious. They don’t want you to be swayed by Trump’s expert insights, spoken plainly, on that day.

Instead, the mainstream media have taken Trump to task for each of his 9/11 blunders, real or imagined. A Daily Beast article, “15 Years of Donald Trump’s 9/11 Lies, Insults, and Slights,” faults Trump for not showing enough emotion at the September 11 Memorial and Museum, “Trump proceeded past the faces with no manifest interest. He breezed by a haunting photo of a woman standing at the edge of the monstrous charred hole that an airliner had punched in the uptown side of the NorthTower.”

CNN headlined a malapropism, “Donald Trump mixes up ‘9/11’ with ‘7/11.’”

The NewRepublic and many others mocked Trump for claiming to see, from more than four miles away, “Many people jumped and I witnessed it, I watched that. I have a view—a view in my apartment that was specifically aimed at the WorldTradeCenter.”

They chastised Trump for falsely claiming that thousands of Muslims cheered 9/11 in Jersey City.

Though scrutinizing Trump on 9/11, they stay clear of his preemptive rebuttal of the government’s farcical explanation. Trump himself won’t dig it up, of course, since he’s angling to be the face of this criminal outfit.

Speaking to AIPAC in March of 2016, Trump proudly declared, “I speak to you today as a lifelong supporter and true friend of Israel. I am a newcomer to politics, but not to backing the Jewish state.”

Trump spoke of 9/11 as “perpetrated by the Islamic fundamentalists,” and Palestinians as hating Jews for no apparent reason, “In Palestinian society, the heroes are those who murder Jews. We can’t let this continue. We can’t let this happen any longer. You cannot achieve peace if terrorists are treated as martyrs. Glorifying terrorists is a tremendous barrier to peace. It is a horrible, horrible way to think. It’s a barrier that can’t be broken. That will end and it’ll end soon, believe me.”

When people have their land stolen, their love ones killed and their way of life destroyed, they will fight back, Donald, but you can’t make sense as you’re pandering. Thus, Israel is America’s “cultural brother,” “the only Democracy in the Middle East” and “there is no daylight between America and our most reliable ally.”

A most reliable ally in what? Sowing global terror, bankrupting Americans and turning WashingtonDC into a whorehouse?

ORDER IT NOW

Trump the politician couldn’t have brownnosed Israel more abjectly, “I love the people in this room. I love Israel. I love Israel. I’ve been with Israel so long in terms of I’ve received some of my greatest honors from Israel, my father before me, incredible. My daughter, Ivanka, is about to have a beautiful Jewish baby.”

Though knowing that the War on Terror was a farce from the beginning, Trump is going along with the Muslim blame game. Craving to be president, Trump must kowtow to the Jewish neo-cons and Israel. Far from being an America-first nativist, Trump will continue that Beltway tradition of destroying America financially, politically and even spiritually, all to prop up Israel.

Linh Dinh is the author of two books of stories, five of poems, and a novel, Love Like Hate. He’s tracking our deteriorating socialscape through his frequently updated photo blog, Postcards from the End of America.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: 9/11, Donald Trump 
84 Comments to "Trump and 9/11"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Smiddy says:

    The audio clip mysteriously originated in deep underground facebook conspiracy blogs, from my observations, which I thought was odd (being as they weren’t just publicly sharing the same post, as if they had all received the audio independently).

    This is the first place I saw it, was posted September 13th (3 days before the above youtube video).

    https://www.facebook.com/stfnews/videos/1145505108859931/

    At the time I searched the internet with his quotes from the audio and I found absolutely NILCH! I couldn’t even find one sliver of a reference to it (via google)…

    Has anyone stumbled onto an earlier source?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /ldinh/trump-and-911/#comment-1588851
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Smiddy says:

    “Though knowing that the War on Terror was a farce from the beginning, Trump is going along with the Muslim blame game. Craving to be president, Trump must kowtow to the Jewish neo-cons and Israel. Far from being an America-first nativist, Trump will continue that Beltway tradition of destroying America financially, politically and even spiritually, all to prop up Israel.”

    Its called political proxy warfare, why is this so hard for so many to comprehend? It would be literal and political suicide if Trump came out with the whole truth, so he red-pills in partial truths (he’s been doing it for a while now…). It’s a lot more politically expedient to call out the messenger or middle-men in today’s system (aka The Matrix).

    Trump uses fire to beat fire… He uses deceit to beat deceit. You know, this could JUST be him deciding this isn’t a battle worth fighting overtly… He was highly critical of Israel before his AIPAC speech, in fact it is the only major topic which he really has done a full reversal…

    Aren’t 4 or Trump’s 5 kids with or married to Jewish Americans?… Isn’t Trump very characteristically Jewish in behavior?… Anyone ever read a chapter called “National Socialism as a Jewish anti-Evolutionary Strategy”?… Anyone noticed how Trump has been brilliantly playing the media at (((their))) own game?…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rehmat
    Donald Trump owes his wealth to his collaboration with the Russian Jewish mafia. He knows that he cannot climb the political ladder in the United States without licking AIPAC's AZZ.

    It's interesting to note while the American Judeo-Christian politicians and White supremacist portrays Muslims to be the greatest threat to United States - it's the anti-Muslims who acts like traitors by professing their loyalties to a foreign entity.

    On Sunday, held a 90-minute very private meeting with Donald Trump at Trump Tower, New York. Trump’s campaign released a statement after the meeting, saying the two men spoke about terrorism, Iran, ISIS and cybersecurity. There was no mention of the two-state Palestine solution.

    The PLO secretary-general Saeb Erekat, who reportedly had sex with Israel’s former justice minister Tzipi Livni, slammed Donald Trump over his ignorance of Jerusalem status.

    Later, Bibi held a 50-minute meeting with Jewish Lobby’s choice, Hillary Clinton. She told him that she is against the US or UN pressuring Israel to accept an independent Palestinian state.

    Netanyahu, a typical coward Zionist Jew, needed a group of 20 security agents to go to bathroom in New York......

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/09/27/king-netanyahu-visits-us-colony/
  3. eD says:

    Dinh is great at giving his impressions on local color but weak on analysis. That is fine. I really like his local color pieces on the many down-and-out neighborhoods in the Philadelphia area. He has to raise his game if he wants to break until Unz/ Roberts/ Giraldi, or even Sailer or Englehardt territory, to name writers featured on this site.

    Anyway, the basic argument I got is that Trump was a 9-11 skeptic before being a 9-11 skeptic was cool, and then backtracked when he ran for office. Even if this charge is correct, its completely understandable.

    On September 11th and September 12th there were all sorts of speculation in the mainstream media about the attacks, until the narrative settled that was ultimately endorsed by the Kean-Hamilton commission. I remember looking at the news reports. That this was the work of Arab Muslims and Al Queda gelled pretty quickly, but I remember thinking that it was right-wing American groups like the ones supposedly behind the Oklahoma City bombing. Up to that point, these groups had actually taken more American lives in terrorism attacks than the Muslims, so I think this was a reasonable assumption at the time. Initial reports had a small plane, not a commercial airliner, flying into the North Tower, and no plane at all involved with the Pentagon explosion. The Commission sort of took alot of loose strands and created a story. Parts of this are more supported than others.

    Trump speculating about things, in his rambling style, in the days immediately after the attack, is not a big deal, even if some of his speculations turned out to be different than the story that was eventually told. As Linh points out, the story hadn’t gelled yet. GW Bush and Rumsfeld gave statements in public that turned out to differ from the story.

    The Twin Towers were unique in that they were mainly supported by an exoskeletin of external steel columns, instead of one floor supported by another, supplemented by internal columns at the center. This confounds alot of truthers and supporters of the official story. They simply weren’t going to behave like normal buildings when under stress. Looking at collapses or planes flying into normal buildings (there are examples, and no they don’t behave the same way) doesn’t help. The bombs in the basement wouldn’t have brought them down because there was nothing in the basement supporting them. You had to compromise the external supports, which is what the planes did. Maybe a commercial airliner by itself wouldn’t have been enough, but if you were going to take down these buildings, something like that is how you would have done this. But Trump is correct that buildings of that size always incorporate measures making them very difficult to destroy. Incidentally, it is plausible that they were wired for demolition if their structures were compromised to keep them from toppling onto other buildings in the area.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    And you state that Lihn Dihn is weak on analysis. Pot meet kettle.

    The speed and symmetry of the "collapses" cannot be explained by your account unless Newton is relegated to theorist status.

    , @artichoke
    Engineered demolition, modified of course for the particular structure being taken down, would be the expected way to take such buildings down neatly in their footprint. Indeed one can see squibs in at least one photo, and I've heard thermite was found in the wreckage.

    The buildings were demolished. The cause of collapse was nothing else.

    I don't know who planned and carried out this mission. Maybe it was Muslims, maybe not. The author sort of vaguely implies it was Israel, similarly without proof. If the author is going to say such a thing, he or she should have the guts to say it plainly.
    , @BB753
    Most people are unable to understand that two seemingly contradictory statements can be true: namely that a Saudi terrorist attack and a controlled demolition by the authorities likely caused the towers to crumble in concert.

    Once hit, the towers would have destroyed half of Manhattan had they toppled onto the surrounding buildings, causing a domino and/or ripple effect.

    It's plausible NY authorities decided to demolish them to avoid further destruction and casualties. Of course, authorities would never admit to that.

    Not only because it would tarnish the heroic narrative but also because they would have to admit that they blew up valuable property with citizens stiil alive inside.

    Voila! Mistery solved. Saudis ( likely not Osama) launch a false flag attack whith neocon - infiltrated American intelligence caught off-guard (once again), while Mossad looks the other way. Both Saudi Arabia and Israel wanted to destroy Saddam, and Saudi Intelligence and the CIA kindly provided a James Bond villain (Osama Bin Laden) to the masses eager for a scapegoat. Thus turning a third-rate Mahdi wannabe into a Muslim superstar.

  4. Trump was right about the base columns, but he was playing hooky when his high-school physics teacher wrote KE = 1/2 mv^2 on the chalkboard. In this case m was about two orders of magnitude greater than that of a car, and v was about one order of magnitude greater. So the kinetic energy transferred to the building on impact was 10000 times greater than that of a speeding car’s impact.

    With that we should expect holes in steel. Of course, the collapse of the building is a different matter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @OutWest
    Also, as the planed went through the builds the insulation protecting the steel would have been stripped.
  5. utu says:

    Thank you for writing this article Mr. Dinh and posting the interview with DT. I was not aware of this interview. In it DT comes across as rational and knowledgable. A person with a common sense who thinks for himself.

    Read More
  6. @eD
    Dinh is great at giving his impressions on local color but weak on analysis. That is fine. I really like his local color pieces on the many down-and-out neighborhoods in the Philadelphia area. He has to raise his game if he wants to break until Unz/ Roberts/ Giraldi, or even Sailer or Englehardt territory, to name writers featured on this site.

    Anyway, the basic argument I got is that Trump was a 9-11 skeptic before being a 9-11 skeptic was cool, and then backtracked when he ran for office. Even if this charge is correct, its completely understandable.

    On September 11th and September 12th there were all sorts of speculation in the mainstream media about the attacks, until the narrative settled that was ultimately endorsed by the Kean-Hamilton commission. I remember looking at the news reports. That this was the work of Arab Muslims and Al Queda gelled pretty quickly, but I remember thinking that it was right-wing American groups like the ones supposedly behind the Oklahoma City bombing. Up to that point, these groups had actually taken more American lives in terrorism attacks than the Muslims, so I think this was a reasonable assumption at the time. Initial reports had a small plane, not a commercial airliner, flying into the North Tower, and no plane at all involved with the Pentagon explosion. The Commission sort of took alot of loose strands and created a story. Parts of this are more supported than others.

    Trump speculating about things, in his rambling style, in the days immediately after the attack, is not a big deal, even if some of his speculations turned out to be different than the story that was eventually told. As Linh points out, the story hadn't gelled yet. GW Bush and Rumsfeld gave statements in public that turned out to differ from the story.

    The Twin Towers were unique in that they were mainly supported by an exoskeletin of external steel columns, instead of one floor supported by another, supplemented by internal columns at the center. This confounds alot of truthers and supporters of the official story. They simply weren't going to behave like normal buildings when under stress. Looking at collapses or planes flying into normal buildings (there are examples, and no they don't behave the same way) doesn't help. The bombs in the basement wouldn't have brought them down because there was nothing in the basement supporting them. You had to compromise the external supports, which is what the planes did. Maybe a commercial airliner by itself wouldn't have been enough, but if you were going to take down these buildings, something like that is how you would have done this. But Trump is correct that buildings of that size always incorporate measures making them very difficult to destroy. Incidentally, it is plausible that they were wired for demolition if their structures were compromised to keep them from toppling onto other buildings in the area.

    And you state that Lihn Dihn is weak on analysis. Pot meet kettle.

    The speed and symmetry of the “collapses” cannot be explained by your account unless Newton is relegated to theorist status.

    Read More
  7. Miro23 says:

    Trump knows all about the structures of high rise buildings and knows for instance that Building 7 didn’t fall due to fire.

    He’s choosing to go along with the oficial lie to get elected, but the really worrying part is that all his talk about trade deals, outsourcing, enforcing immigration laws, stopping $billion Middle East wars may also be a lie to get elected, so who really has any idea what he would do as President?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Craig Morris
    "who really has any idea what he would do as President?"

    I don't think he himself has any idea what he will actually do, so how could anyone else?

    On the other hand if you want someone who really knows what they will do, vote for Clinton.
  8. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    Everyone always talks about WTC 1,2 and 7, but what about WTC 6, also destroyed on 9/11?

    What about the mysterious 9/11 explosion at WTC 6 that sent building fragments over 500 feet into the air? Before the smoke had cleared from around the stricken South Tower, a mysterious explosion shot 550 feet into the air above the U.S. Customs House at 6 World Trade Center. This unexplained blast at the Customs House has never been investigated or reported in the mainstream media.

    No plane hit WTC 6 and there was no fire, so what caused WTC 6 to explode from WITHIN the evening of 9/11?

    One could also mention that hundreds of millions of dollars of gold and silver bullion was stolen from the basement of WTC 4 the night BEFORE 9/11. Did Benjamin Laden and crew tire of visiting tittie bars, drinking copious amounts of booze, snorting cocaine, and leaving behind their Korans and get their kicks the night BEFORE 9/11 by stealing gold and silver bullion?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Old fogey
    Buildings 3, 4, and 5 also went down, while no building without a "WTC" designation in the ring of buildings surrounding the site crashed. The specificity was uncanny.
  9. Roc says:

    Follow the links to Trumpcommission.org. My impression is that they are handing trump the election if his team chooses to pursue the facts that exist. If you remain skeptical, follow further to 911marines.org. Too many heavy weights have weight in for deniers to have much influence any more.

    Read More
  10. Jason Liu says:

    Interesting. Kinda surprised how the media hasn’t hit him much on the trutherism. To me, believing in conspiracy theories is a greater demerit for the presidency than racism or sexism, but I guess I’m weird.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky

    To me, believing in conspiracy theories is a greater demerit for the presidency than racism or sexism, but I guess I’m weird.
     
    No, you're not "weird". You're just a completely brainwashed fool.
    , @No_0ne
    "...believing in conspiracy theories is a greater demerit..."

    So you believe that the Twin Towers were brought down by one man, acting alone?
  11. Rehmat says:

    Forget what Trump or others say about 9/11. Let the Jewish Lobby find a new culprit behind 9/11 as Barack Obama has torpedo its blaming Saudi Arabia – after blaming al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, Iraq, Iran and Hizbullah to name a few.

    In February 2016, after insulting the Kosher Pope Francis I, Donald Trump questioned the so-called “official 9/11 story” – but he did not call it an Israeli false flag operation. In order not to drive the Establishment crazy, he blamed Saudi ‘royals’ for funding the 9/11 operation.

    Speaking at a campaign event at Bluffton, SC, GOP frontrunner Donald Trump continued his criticism of former US president George Bush, a war criminal, and once again raising the issue of attack on World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. He accused Bush for lying about Iraqi WMDs and invading Iraq based on 9/11 attacks.

    “We went after Iraq, they did not knock down the World Trade Center. It wasn’t Iraqis that knocked down the World Trade Center. We went after Iraq, we decimated the country, Iran’s taking over, okay. But it wasn’t Iraqis, you will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center. Because they have papers in there that are very secret – you may find it’s the Saudis,” Trump told his sheep.

    In other words, Trump pledged to form another ‘9/11 Commission’ if elected next US president, that would blame Saudi ‘royals’ in order to whitewash Israeli hands behind 9/11.

    As result of Trump raising the 9/11 card, George Bush’s younger brother Jeb Bush has announced walk-out from GOP presidential race.

    Trump’s mention of 9/11 re-investigation irked the Jewish Lobby. Radio talk-show host Mark Levin labeled Trump “radical kook” and 9/11 Truther. He also compared him with anti-war women activist group Code Pink….

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/02/22/donald-trump-im-911-truther/

    Read More
  12. Boris says:

    Trump is dumb enough to be a truther. Good point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greg Bacon
    Such is the state of intelligence in this corrupt, sadistic, thuggish world that truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away.
  13. Greg Bacon says: • Website
    @Boris
    Trump is dumb enough to be a truther. Good point.

    Such is the state of intelligence in this corrupt, sadistic, thuggish world that truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    hahaha nice dig :)
    , @Boris

    truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away.
     
    The truth is that Trump has no idea what he's talking about. So "Trump couldn’t believe a plane could pierce them" is meaningless.
    , @Miro23
    ["Such is the state of intelligence in this corrupt, sadistic, thuggish world that truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away."]

    In fact, just like the Soviet Union, based on lies. There were plenty of people there to report on "dumb truthers" and get them arrested for a reward.

  14. @Greg Bacon
    Such is the state of intelligence in this corrupt, sadistic, thuggish world that truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away.

    hahaha nice dig :)

    Read More
  15. MMM says:

    Excellent article (as usual) by a brilliant writer with genuine integrity.

    Telling it like it is: “Craving to be president, Trump must kowtow to the Jewish neo-cons and Israel. Far from being an America-first nativist, Trump will continue that Beltway tradition of destroying America financially, politically and even spiritually, all to prop up Israel.”

    Hope is all we have now for the immediate future. Let’s hope it turns out better than this – if it doesn’t, we’ve had it. Bound and gagged for “Israel” and its mafia.

    Until we manage in time to free ourselves – the drama is ongoing. No destruction is final.

    Read More
    • Replies: @prusmc
    And HRC will be indebted to no one and let the chips fall where they may and the truth will make us free.
  16. space aliens from the crab nebula destroyed the towers with gravity wave synthesizers. i saw it on fox news, it has to be true.

    Read More
  17. OutWest says:
    @landlubber
    Trump was right about the base columns, but he was playing hooky when his high-school physics teacher wrote KE = 1/2 mv^2 on the chalkboard. In this case m was about two orders of magnitude greater than that of a car, and v was about one order of magnitude greater. So the kinetic energy transferred to the building on impact was 10000 times greater than that of a speeding car's impact.

    With that we should expect holes in steel. Of course, the collapse of the building is a different matter.

    Also, as the planed went through the builds the insulation protecting the steel would have been stripped.

    Read More
  18. I believe Trump when he says he could see the jumpers from four miles away. I saw a video online shot from New Jersey and you could see the jumpers, although the person behind the camera didn’t quite understand what they were. The physics support that a plane travelling at that speed could indeed penetrate the steel, though it seems counter-intuitive…Think of how a lead bullet(a relatively soft metal) can penetrate many far more dense objects, speed multiplies force…Trump has to tow the party-line during the campaign, and their last desperate effort to shift the blame away from the Neo-Cons is the whole Saudi Arabia and the 28 pages canard…

    Read More
    • Replies: @DaveE
    Counter-intuitive? More like moronic.

    Go get a gun, stand in front of a steel I-beam and shoot. The closer the better, to utilize the maximum inertia of the bullet.

    I triple-dog dare ya'.

    One less moron.
  19. To MMM,

    I liked your comment, “…Trump will continue that Beltway tradition of destroying America financially, politically, and even spiritually.”

    However, and respectfully speaking, the utterly destructive “Process” (accurately described above) started right after the diabolical murder of JFK and transparent cover up. Kennedy was the last POTUS to unaccountably govern according to the demands of Israel.

    One of America’s best opportunity NOW to avoid a “We’ve had it… bound & gagged by Israel” scenario is to seek what information is presently available (via the soul saving internet) and look at the source of modern (“False Flag”) terrorism. See you Tube video below?

    To conclude, at the end of Christopher Bollyn’s book, “Solving 9-11,” is a quote from Galatians 6:7 which recommends, “Be not deceived…” Such is one good way to “free oneself” and afterward perhaps others. Thank you, MMM!

    Read More
    • Replies: @artichoke
    So by the end of his book, does Christopher Bollyn solve 9/11 ?
  20. @Miro23
    Trump knows all about the structures of high rise buildings and knows for instance that Building 7 didn't fall due to fire.

    He's choosing to go along with the oficial lie to get elected, but the really worrying part is that all his talk about trade deals, outsourcing, enforcing immigration laws, stopping $billion Middle East wars may also be a lie to get elected, so who really has any idea what he would do as President?

    “who really has any idea what he would do as President?”

    I don’t think he himself has any idea what he will actually do, so how could anyone else?

    On the other hand if you want someone who really knows what they will do, vote for Clinton.

    Read More
  21. Boris says:
    @Greg Bacon
    Such is the state of intelligence in this corrupt, sadistic, thuggish world that truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away.

    truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away.

    The truth is that Trump has no idea what he’s talking about. So “Trump couldn’t believe a plane could pierce them” is meaningless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    I think Trump's familiarity with building construction materials, methods, and principles is a Hell of a lot better than yours or mine.
  22. woodNfish says:

    (CNN) chastised Trump for falsely claiming that thousands of Muslims cheered 9/11 in Jersey City.

    It was not a false claim. It is a documented fact that the LLSM and Dinh choose to ignore.

    http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/trumps-claims-about-muslims-after-911-confirmed-video/

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/12/01/7-pieces-of-documentation-that-vindicate-trumps-claim-of-911-muslim-celebrations/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boris

    It was not a false claim.
     
    Even your awful sources (Breitbart? lol) agree that there weren't thousands of Muslims celebrating. Trump is wrong.
  23. Miro23 says:
    @Greg Bacon
    Such is the state of intelligence in this corrupt, sadistic, thuggish world that truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away.

    ["Such is the state of intelligence in this corrupt, sadistic, thuggish world that truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away."]

    In fact, just like the Soviet Union, based on lies. There were plenty of people there to report on “dumb truthers” and get them arrested for a reward.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boris

    In fact, just like the Soviet Union, based on lies. There were plenty of people there to report on “dumb truthers” and get them arrested for a reward.
     
    So now you pretend to be persecuted as well, huh? Nobody is arresting you. We're just laughing.
  24. Boris says:
    @woodNfish

    (CNN) chastised Trump for falsely claiming that thousands of Muslims cheered 9/11 in Jersey City.
     
    It was not a false claim. It is a documented fact that the LLSM and Dinh choose to ignore.

    http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/trumps-claims-about-muslims-after-911-confirmed-video/

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/12/01/7-pieces-of-documentation-that-vindicate-trumps-claim-of-911-muslim-celebrations/

    It was not a false claim.

    Even your awful sources (Breitbart? lol) agree that there weren’t thousands of Muslims celebrating. Trump is wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Yes, putting "lol" after a source's name really provides a logical reason to discount items coming from that source. Very convincing.

    I've never visited breitbart website but now I may have to do so.
  25. Boris says:
    @Miro23
    ["Such is the state of intelligence in this corrupt, sadistic, thuggish world that truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away."]

    In fact, just like the Soviet Union, based on lies. There were plenty of people there to report on "dumb truthers" and get them arrested for a reward.

    In fact, just like the Soviet Union, based on lies. There were plenty of people there to report on “dumb truthers” and get them arrested for a reward.

    So now you pretend to be persecuted as well, huh? Nobody is arresting you. We’re just laughing.

    Read More
  26. artichoke says:
    @eD
    Dinh is great at giving his impressions on local color but weak on analysis. That is fine. I really like his local color pieces on the many down-and-out neighborhoods in the Philadelphia area. He has to raise his game if he wants to break until Unz/ Roberts/ Giraldi, or even Sailer or Englehardt territory, to name writers featured on this site.

    Anyway, the basic argument I got is that Trump was a 9-11 skeptic before being a 9-11 skeptic was cool, and then backtracked when he ran for office. Even if this charge is correct, its completely understandable.

    On September 11th and September 12th there were all sorts of speculation in the mainstream media about the attacks, until the narrative settled that was ultimately endorsed by the Kean-Hamilton commission. I remember looking at the news reports. That this was the work of Arab Muslims and Al Queda gelled pretty quickly, but I remember thinking that it was right-wing American groups like the ones supposedly behind the Oklahoma City bombing. Up to that point, these groups had actually taken more American lives in terrorism attacks than the Muslims, so I think this was a reasonable assumption at the time. Initial reports had a small plane, not a commercial airliner, flying into the North Tower, and no plane at all involved with the Pentagon explosion. The Commission sort of took alot of loose strands and created a story. Parts of this are more supported than others.

    Trump speculating about things, in his rambling style, in the days immediately after the attack, is not a big deal, even if some of his speculations turned out to be different than the story that was eventually told. As Linh points out, the story hadn't gelled yet. GW Bush and Rumsfeld gave statements in public that turned out to differ from the story.

    The Twin Towers were unique in that they were mainly supported by an exoskeletin of external steel columns, instead of one floor supported by another, supplemented by internal columns at the center. This confounds alot of truthers and supporters of the official story. They simply weren't going to behave like normal buildings when under stress. Looking at collapses or planes flying into normal buildings (there are examples, and no they don't behave the same way) doesn't help. The bombs in the basement wouldn't have brought them down because there was nothing in the basement supporting them. You had to compromise the external supports, which is what the planes did. Maybe a commercial airliner by itself wouldn't have been enough, but if you were going to take down these buildings, something like that is how you would have done this. But Trump is correct that buildings of that size always incorporate measures making them very difficult to destroy. Incidentally, it is plausible that they were wired for demolition if their structures were compromised to keep them from toppling onto other buildings in the area.

    Engineered demolition, modified of course for the particular structure being taken down, would be the expected way to take such buildings down neatly in their footprint. Indeed one can see squibs in at least one photo, and I’ve heard thermite was found in the wreckage.

    The buildings were demolished. The cause of collapse was nothing else.

    I don’t know who planned and carried out this mission. Maybe it was Muslims, maybe not. The author sort of vaguely implies it was Israel, similarly without proof. If the author is going to say such a thing, he or she should have the guts to say it plainly.

    Read More
  27. artichoke says:
    @Chuck Orloski
    To MMM,

    I liked your comment, "...Trump will continue that Beltway tradition of destroying America financially, politically, and even spiritually."

    However, and respectfully speaking, the utterly destructive "Process" (accurately described above) started right after the diabolical murder of JFK and transparent cover up. Kennedy was the last POTUS to unaccountably govern according to the demands of Israel.

    One of America's best opportunity NOW to avoid a "We've had it... bound & gagged by Israel" scenario is to seek what information is presently available (via the soul saving internet) and look at the source of modern ("False Flag") terrorism. See you Tube video below?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8ZavzbeaFE

    To conclude, at the end of Christopher Bollyn's book, "Solving 9-11," is a quote from Galatians 6:7 which recommends, "Be not deceived..." Such is one good way to "free oneself" and afterward perhaps others. Thank you, MMM!

    So by the end of his book, does Christopher Bollyn solve 9/11 ?

    Read More
  28. artichoke says:
    @Rehmat
    Forget what Trump or others say about 9/11. Let the Jewish Lobby find a new culprit behind 9/11 as Barack Obama has torpedo its blaming Saudi Arabia - after blaming al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, Iraq, Iran and Hizbullah to name a few.

    In February 2016, after insulting the Kosher Pope Francis I, Donald Trump questioned the so-called “official 9/11 story” – but he did not call it an Israeli false flag operation. In order not to drive the Establishment crazy, he blamed Saudi ‘royals’ for funding the 9/11 operation.

    Speaking at a campaign event at Bluffton, SC, GOP frontrunner Donald Trump continued his criticism of former US president George Bush, a war criminal, and once again raising the issue of attack on World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. He accused Bush for lying about Iraqi WMDs and invading Iraq based on 9/11 attacks.

    “We went after Iraq, they did not knock down the World Trade Center. It wasn’t Iraqis that knocked down the World Trade Center. We went after Iraq, we decimated the country, Iran’s taking over, okay. But it wasn’t Iraqis, you will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center. Because they have papers in there that are very secret – you may find it’s the Saudis,” Trump told his sheep.

    In other words, Trump pledged to form another ‘9/11 Commission’ if elected next US president, that would blame Saudi ‘royals’ in order to whitewash Israeli hands behind 9/11.

    As result of Trump raising the 9/11 card, George Bush’s younger brother Jeb Bush has announced walk-out from GOP presidential race.

    Trump’s mention of 9/11 re-investigation irked the Jewish Lobby. Radio talk-show host Mark Levin labeled Trump “radical kook” and 9/11 Truther. He also compared him with anti-war women activist group Code Pink....

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/02/22/donald-trump-im-911-truther/

    You assume without proof that it was Mossad.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    You assume without proof that it was Mossad.

    The Mossad was fallowing the 9/11 Arabs attackers in Florida and California.

    Why didn’t the Jews tell the US government – Why didn’t Netanyahu give Bush a call?

    p.s. Netanyahu just claimed at the UN, that Israel had the best spy agency in the world (15 million strong).
    , @Rehmat
    I don't assume anything. I just agree with Israeli Zionist Jewish writer, author, and radio talk-show host Barry Chamish who confirmed in an interview in August 2012 that Israel committed 9/11.

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/08/22/israeli-jew-author-zionists-did-911/
  29. Art says:
    @artichoke
    You assume without proof that it was Mossad.

    You assume without proof that it was Mossad.

    The Mossad was fallowing the 9/11 Arabs attackers in Florida and California.

    Why didn’t the Jews tell the US government – Why didn’t Netanyahu give Bush a call?

    p.s. Netanyahu just claimed at the UN, that Israel had the best spy agency in the world (15 million strong).

    Read More
  30. @Jason Liu
    Interesting. Kinda surprised how the media hasn't hit him much on the trutherism. To me, believing in conspiracy theories is a greater demerit for the presidency than racism or sexism, but I guess I'm weird.

    To me, believing in conspiracy theories is a greater demerit for the presidency than racism or sexism, but I guess I’m weird.

    No, you’re not “weird”. You’re just a completely brainwashed fool.

    Read More
  31. Rehmat says:
    @artichoke
    You assume without proof that it was Mossad.

    I don’t assume anything. I just agree with Israeli Zionist Jewish writer, author, and radio talk-show host Barry Chamish who confirmed in an interview in August 2012 that Israel committed 9/11.

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/08/22/israeli-jew-author-zionists-did-911/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boris
    Oh, well, if some idiot says it with no proof, then it must be true.
  32. Thanks, Rehmat, for supplying the Chamish interview “link” which might help others go far beyond unnecessary 9-11 misconceptions.

    Read More
  33. @Boris

    truth is so reviled and dangerous that it must be made fun of and kept locked away.
     
    The truth is that Trump has no idea what he's talking about. So "Trump couldn’t believe a plane could pierce them" is meaningless.

    I think Trump’s familiarity with building construction materials, methods, and principles is a Hell of a lot better than yours or mine.

    Read More
  34. @Boris

    It was not a false claim.
     
    Even your awful sources (Breitbart? lol) agree that there weren't thousands of Muslims celebrating. Trump is wrong.

    Yes, putting “lol” after a source’s name really provides a logical reason to discount items coming from that source. Very convincing.

    I’ve never visited breitbart website but now I may have to do so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boris
    The guy that ran Breitbart now runs Trump's campaign. They are obviously in the tank for Trump.

    I think Trump’s familiarity with building construction materials, methods, and principles is a Hell of a lot better than yours or mine.
     
    It's possible. But when he asks "how could a plane, even a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this steel?" he is not using any of that knowledge. (The answer is: with enough acceleration.)
  35. Boris says:
    @Rehmat
    I don't assume anything. I just agree with Israeli Zionist Jewish writer, author, and radio talk-show host Barry Chamish who confirmed in an interview in August 2012 that Israel committed 9/11.

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/08/22/israeli-jew-author-zionists-did-911/

    Oh, well, if some idiot says it with no proof, then it must be true.

    Read More
  36. Rehmat says:
    @Smiddy
    "Though knowing that the War on Terror was a farce from the beginning, Trump is going along with the Muslim blame game. Craving to be president, Trump must kowtow to the Jewish neo-cons and Israel. Far from being an America-first nativist, Trump will continue that Beltway tradition of destroying America financially, politically and even spiritually, all to prop up Israel."

    Its called political proxy warfare, why is this so hard for so many to comprehend? It would be literal and political suicide if Trump came out with the whole truth, so he red-pills in partial truths (he's been doing it for a while now...). It's a lot more politically expedient to call out the messenger or middle-men in today's system (aka The Matrix).

    Trump uses fire to beat fire... He uses deceit to beat deceit. You know, this could JUST be him deciding this isn't a battle worth fighting overtly... He was highly critical of Israel before his AIPAC speech, in fact it is the only major topic which he really has done a full reversal...

    Aren't 4 or Trump's 5 kids with or married to Jewish Americans?... Isn't Trump very characteristically Jewish in behavior?... Anyone ever read a chapter called "National Socialism as a Jewish anti-Evolutionary Strategy"?... Anyone noticed how Trump has been brilliantly playing the media at (((their))) own game?...

    Donald Trump owes his wealth to his collaboration with the Russian Jewish mafia. He knows that he cannot climb the political ladder in the United States without licking AIPAC’s AZZ.

    It’s interesting to note while the American Judeo-Christian politicians and White supremacist portrays Muslims to be the greatest threat to United States – it’s the anti-Muslims who acts like traitors by professing their loyalties to a foreign entity.

    On Sunday, held a 90-minute very private meeting with Donald Trump at Trump Tower, New York. Trump’s campaign released a statement after the meeting, saying the two men spoke about terrorism, Iran, ISIS and cybersecurity. There was no mention of the two-state Palestine solution.

    The PLO secretary-general Saeb Erekat, who reportedly had sex with Israel’s former justice minister Tzipi Livni, slammed Donald Trump over his ignorance of Jerusalem status.

    Later, Bibi held a 50-minute meeting with Jewish Lobby’s choice, Hillary Clinton. She told him that she is against the US or UN pressuring Israel to accept an independent Palestinian state.

    Netanyahu, a typical coward Zionist Jew, needed a group of 20 security agents to go to bathroom in New York……

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/09/27/king-netanyahu-visits-us-colony/

    Read More
    • Replies: @nsa
    This stuff is hilarious.....two gentile seniles, der Trumster and La Clinton, bump heads going for the zipper of the sleazy furniture salesman from Philly. You should be damn happy Israel exists as otherwise we would have another 8 million relentlessly awful jooies over here to deal with........think about it.....scary thought, huh?
  37. Boris says:
    @RadicalCenter
    Yes, putting "lol" after a source's name really provides a logical reason to discount items coming from that source. Very convincing.

    I've never visited breitbart website but now I may have to do so.

    The guy that ran Breitbart now runs Trump’s campaign. They are obviously in the tank for Trump.

    I think Trump’s familiarity with building construction materials, methods, and principles is a Hell of a lot better than yours or mine.

    It’s possible. But when he asks “how could a plane, even a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this steel?” he is not using any of that knowledge. (The answer is: with enough acceleration.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "The answer is: with enough acceleration."

    Acceleration has nothing to do with it. The planes had close to zero acceleration when impacted the buildings.

    Velocity!
  38. utu says:
    @Boris
    The guy that ran Breitbart now runs Trump's campaign. They are obviously in the tank for Trump.

    I think Trump’s familiarity with building construction materials, methods, and principles is a Hell of a lot better than yours or mine.
     
    It's possible. But when he asks "how could a plane, even a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this steel?" he is not using any of that knowledge. (The answer is: with enough acceleration.)

    “The answer is: with enough acceleration.”

    Acceleration has nothing to do with it. The planes had close to zero acceleration when impacted the buildings.

    Velocity!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boris
    I was going to write velocity, but acceleration is technically correct. The energy comes from the impact's deceleration, which is the same as acceleration in physics. It's the change in velocity that matters (F=ma.).
  39. BB753 says:
    @eD
    Dinh is great at giving his impressions on local color but weak on analysis. That is fine. I really like his local color pieces on the many down-and-out neighborhoods in the Philadelphia area. He has to raise his game if he wants to break until Unz/ Roberts/ Giraldi, or even Sailer or Englehardt territory, to name writers featured on this site.

    Anyway, the basic argument I got is that Trump was a 9-11 skeptic before being a 9-11 skeptic was cool, and then backtracked when he ran for office. Even if this charge is correct, its completely understandable.

    On September 11th and September 12th there were all sorts of speculation in the mainstream media about the attacks, until the narrative settled that was ultimately endorsed by the Kean-Hamilton commission. I remember looking at the news reports. That this was the work of Arab Muslims and Al Queda gelled pretty quickly, but I remember thinking that it was right-wing American groups like the ones supposedly behind the Oklahoma City bombing. Up to that point, these groups had actually taken more American lives in terrorism attacks than the Muslims, so I think this was a reasonable assumption at the time. Initial reports had a small plane, not a commercial airliner, flying into the North Tower, and no plane at all involved with the Pentagon explosion. The Commission sort of took alot of loose strands and created a story. Parts of this are more supported than others.

    Trump speculating about things, in his rambling style, in the days immediately after the attack, is not a big deal, even if some of his speculations turned out to be different than the story that was eventually told. As Linh points out, the story hadn't gelled yet. GW Bush and Rumsfeld gave statements in public that turned out to differ from the story.

    The Twin Towers were unique in that they were mainly supported by an exoskeletin of external steel columns, instead of one floor supported by another, supplemented by internal columns at the center. This confounds alot of truthers and supporters of the official story. They simply weren't going to behave like normal buildings when under stress. Looking at collapses or planes flying into normal buildings (there are examples, and no they don't behave the same way) doesn't help. The bombs in the basement wouldn't have brought them down because there was nothing in the basement supporting them. You had to compromise the external supports, which is what the planes did. Maybe a commercial airliner by itself wouldn't have been enough, but if you were going to take down these buildings, something like that is how you would have done this. But Trump is correct that buildings of that size always incorporate measures making them very difficult to destroy. Incidentally, it is plausible that they were wired for demolition if their structures were compromised to keep them from toppling onto other buildings in the area.

    Most people are unable to understand that two seemingly contradictory statements can be true: namely that a Saudi terrorist attack and a controlled demolition by the authorities likely caused the towers to crumble in concert.

    Once hit, the towers would have destroyed half of Manhattan had they toppled onto the surrounding buildings, causing a domino and/or ripple effect.

    It’s plausible NY authorities decided to demolish them to avoid further destruction and casualties. Of course, authorities would never admit to that.

    Not only because it would tarnish the heroic narrative but also because they would have to admit that they blew up valuable property with citizens stiil alive inside.

    Voila! Mistery solved. Saudis ( likely not Osama) launch a false flag attack whith neocon – infiltrated American intelligence caught off-guard (once again), while Mossad looks the other way. Both Saudi Arabia and Israel wanted to destroy Saddam, and Saudi Intelligence and the CIA kindly provided a James Bond villain (Osama Bin Laden) to the masses eager for a scapegoat. Thus turning a third-rate Mahdi wannabe into a Muslim superstar.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eD
    BB753, thanks for understanding my point. You expressed it more clearly and directly than I did.

    I didn't address the other things that happened that day, such as the hijackings and the Pentagon attack. My point was that evidence that the World Trade Center complex was brought down by controlled demolitions actually does not have anything to do with the other events. They could have been wired for demolition when constructed, or after the 1993 bombing, with the idea that they would be demolished to avoid toppling onto other buildings and people in the city. If the order to demolish them was given with people still inside, this is still something as you noted that the local and federal government (and media) would prefer that people not know, even if the buildings were damaged by planes commandeered by Muslim terrorists as advertised.

    One interesting thing about that day is that alot of the anomalies and actions to cover up events that Truthers have diligently uncovered have explanations that would be both highly embarrassing to the government and also consistent with Muslim terrorists attacks, such as at least one of the planes being shot down by interceptors, or Muslim terrorists being able to get access to the Pentagon to plant a bomb, neither of which the Department of Defense would want broadcast.
    , @CanSpeccy

    It’s plausible NY authorities decided to demolish them to avoid further destruction and casualties. Of course, authorities would never admit to that.
     
    But for the authorities to demolish the Twin Towers within a hour or two of their being struck by planes would require that the buildings be wired for demolition in advance, i.e., it would prove foreknowledge of the attack, which is exactly what any sensible person is bound to conclude if they study the evidence.

    And we know that WT7 was pre-wired for demolition because it came down at free-fall speed into its own footprint without being hit by a plane, so from that fact alone, it can be concluded with near certainty that WTC1 and 2 were pre-wired for demolition.
  40. eD says:
    @BB753
    Most people are unable to understand that two seemingly contradictory statements can be true: namely that a Saudi terrorist attack and a controlled demolition by the authorities likely caused the towers to crumble in concert.

    Once hit, the towers would have destroyed half of Manhattan had they toppled onto the surrounding buildings, causing a domino and/or ripple effect.

    It's plausible NY authorities decided to demolish them to avoid further destruction and casualties. Of course, authorities would never admit to that.

    Not only because it would tarnish the heroic narrative but also because they would have to admit that they blew up valuable property with citizens stiil alive inside.

    Voila! Mistery solved. Saudis ( likely not Osama) launch a false flag attack whith neocon - infiltrated American intelligence caught off-guard (once again), while Mossad looks the other way. Both Saudi Arabia and Israel wanted to destroy Saddam, and Saudi Intelligence and the CIA kindly provided a James Bond villain (Osama Bin Laden) to the masses eager for a scapegoat. Thus turning a third-rate Mahdi wannabe into a Muslim superstar.

    BB753, thanks for understanding my point. You expressed it more clearly and directly than I did.

    I didn’t address the other things that happened that day, such as the hijackings and the Pentagon attack. My point was that evidence that the World Trade Center complex was brought down by controlled demolitions actually does not have anything to do with the other events. They could have been wired for demolition when constructed, or after the 1993 bombing, with the idea that they would be demolished to avoid toppling onto other buildings and people in the city. If the order to demolish them was given with people still inside, this is still something as you noted that the local and federal government (and media) would prefer that people not know, even if the buildings were damaged by planes commandeered by Muslim terrorists as advertised.

    One interesting thing about that day is that alot of the anomalies and actions to cover up events that Truthers have diligently uncovered have explanations that would be both highly embarrassing to the government and also consistent with Muslim terrorists attacks, such as at least one of the planes being shot down by interceptors, or Muslim terrorists being able to get access to the Pentagon to plant a bomb, neither of which the Department of Defense would want broadcast.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @BB753
    The most likely explanation indeed is that the towers were previously wired for demolition and that it was part of a contingency plan independent of the attacks, because of the external steel structure of the buildings. Probably well before the 1993 bombing.
  41. BB753 says:
    @eD
    BB753, thanks for understanding my point. You expressed it more clearly and directly than I did.

    I didn't address the other things that happened that day, such as the hijackings and the Pentagon attack. My point was that evidence that the World Trade Center complex was brought down by controlled demolitions actually does not have anything to do with the other events. They could have been wired for demolition when constructed, or after the 1993 bombing, with the idea that they would be demolished to avoid toppling onto other buildings and people in the city. If the order to demolish them was given with people still inside, this is still something as you noted that the local and federal government (and media) would prefer that people not know, even if the buildings were damaged by planes commandeered by Muslim terrorists as advertised.

    One interesting thing about that day is that alot of the anomalies and actions to cover up events that Truthers have diligently uncovered have explanations that would be both highly embarrassing to the government and also consistent with Muslim terrorists attacks, such as at least one of the planes being shot down by interceptors, or Muslim terrorists being able to get access to the Pentagon to plant a bomb, neither of which the Department of Defense would want broadcast.

    The most likely explanation indeed is that the towers were previously wired for demolition and that it was part of a contingency plan independent of the attacks, because of the external steel structure of the buildings. Probably well before the 1993 bombing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    The most likely explanation indeed is that the towers were previously wired for demolition and that it was part of a contingency plan independent of the attacks, because of the external steel structure of the buildings.
     
    Oh, sure. And all the other high-rise buildings in the world are pre-wired for demolition too, no doubt.

    But then why's it such a big secret, since it provides the perfectly innocent explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers? And Why the BS from NIST about the heat of the fires melting the steel?
  42. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @BB753
    Most people are unable to understand that two seemingly contradictory statements can be true: namely that a Saudi terrorist attack and a controlled demolition by the authorities likely caused the towers to crumble in concert.

    Once hit, the towers would have destroyed half of Manhattan had they toppled onto the surrounding buildings, causing a domino and/or ripple effect.

    It's plausible NY authorities decided to demolish them to avoid further destruction and casualties. Of course, authorities would never admit to that.

    Not only because it would tarnish the heroic narrative but also because they would have to admit that they blew up valuable property with citizens stiil alive inside.

    Voila! Mistery solved. Saudis ( likely not Osama) launch a false flag attack whith neocon - infiltrated American intelligence caught off-guard (once again), while Mossad looks the other way. Both Saudi Arabia and Israel wanted to destroy Saddam, and Saudi Intelligence and the CIA kindly provided a James Bond villain (Osama Bin Laden) to the masses eager for a scapegoat. Thus turning a third-rate Mahdi wannabe into a Muslim superstar.

    It’s plausible NY authorities decided to demolish them to avoid further destruction and casualties. Of course, authorities would never admit to that.

    But for the authorities to demolish the Twin Towers within a hour or two of their being struck by planes would require that the buildings be wired for demolition in advance, i.e., it would prove foreknowledge of the attack, which is exactly what any sensible person is bound to conclude if they study the evidence.

    And we know that WT7 was pre-wired for demolition because it came down at free-fall speed into its own footprint without being hit by a plane, so from that fact alone, it can be concluded with near certainty that WTC1 and 2 were pre-wired for demolition.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eD
    "But for the authorities to demolish the Twin Towers within a hour or two of their being struck by planes would require that the buildings be wired for demolition in advance, i.e., it would prove foreknowledge of the attack, which is exactly what any sensible person is bound to conclude if they study the evidence."

    They did have foreknowledge of the attack, or at least the possibility of an attack. There was an attempt to bring the towers down in 1993. The authorities were well aware after 1993 at least that the twin towers were a likely terrorist target.

    Plus when the towers originally constructed, they were the tallest buildings in the world and used a novel design. Every effort was made to ensure that they could withstand being hit by a commercial airliner (this doesn't meant that they could, its just that people were well aware of the possibility and tried to deal with it). A small plane in fact hit the empire state building. There is also always the risk of New York getting hit by a hurricane, which in fact actually happened recently, with the part of Manhattan where the World Trade Center is being hit particularly badly.

    So there was no need for inside information to realize that there was a possibility that something would cause these things to topple over. Now that is an argument against building buildings this tall in the first place, but one counter-measure would be to pre-wire them for demolition, so they could be brought down into their footprints if it looked like there was a possibility of their toppling, though probably the expectation was that everyone in the buildings would be evacuated first.

    The other buildings in the complex contained various sensitive government/ deep state stuff and would be pre-wired so that if they caught on fire, they could be brought down so you wouldn't have non-vetted people going through them and finding stuff there. Building 7 was physically outside the complex and adjacent to other buildings, creating the issue of any fire from that building spreading as well.
    , @map
    Pre-wiring a skyscraper to blow in the event of some accident or weather anomaly seems like a good idea. Equally, maybe skyscrapers are not as strong as we think they are. We know, for example, that they are not perfectly rigid. They do sway in strong winds, by several feet.

    For all we know, this is a dirty little secret of skyscraper design. A skyscraper falling over like a tree and taking down everything in its path would be the biggest disaster in history. Consequently, the design has to make sure that it collapses within its own footprint, either structural weaknesses are built in or the building is pre-wired to blow. It's a sound precaution, but imagine the general public knowing that they are essentially living and working in vulnerable death traps.

    The building was probably brought down due to design and pre-wiring but the public simply does not know about these precautions.
  43. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @BB753
    The most likely explanation indeed is that the towers were previously wired for demolition and that it was part of a contingency plan independent of the attacks, because of the external steel structure of the buildings. Probably well before the 1993 bombing.

    The most likely explanation indeed is that the towers were previously wired for demolition and that it was part of a contingency plan independent of the attacks, because of the external steel structure of the buildings.

    Oh, sure. And all the other high-rise buildings in the world are pre-wired for demolition too, no doubt.

    But then why’s it such a big secret, since it provides the perfectly innocent explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers? And Why the BS from NIST about the heat of the fires melting the steel?

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    It's not innocent in that families of victims could sue. Was demolition necessary?
    As for the bs explanation of the fires melting the steel, of course it was a cover-up. They couldn't go ahead and say: "there was a 40% possibility of either tower or both toppling down so we took the decision to blow them up. So sue us! And the exoskeleton might have been at fault too, it didn't prove totally plane-proof. Go sue the constructor. Also the FBI and aiport security totally screwed up, as did the Air Force and the Pentagon. No, we don't know who did it or why and don't really care. "
  44. nsa says:
    @Rehmat
    Donald Trump owes his wealth to his collaboration with the Russian Jewish mafia. He knows that he cannot climb the political ladder in the United States without licking AIPAC's AZZ.

    It's interesting to note while the American Judeo-Christian politicians and White supremacist portrays Muslims to be the greatest threat to United States - it's the anti-Muslims who acts like traitors by professing their loyalties to a foreign entity.

    On Sunday, held a 90-minute very private meeting with Donald Trump at Trump Tower, New York. Trump’s campaign released a statement after the meeting, saying the two men spoke about terrorism, Iran, ISIS and cybersecurity. There was no mention of the two-state Palestine solution.

    The PLO secretary-general Saeb Erekat, who reportedly had sex with Israel’s former justice minister Tzipi Livni, slammed Donald Trump over his ignorance of Jerusalem status.

    Later, Bibi held a 50-minute meeting with Jewish Lobby’s choice, Hillary Clinton. She told him that she is against the US or UN pressuring Israel to accept an independent Palestinian state.

    Netanyahu, a typical coward Zionist Jew, needed a group of 20 security agents to go to bathroom in New York......

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/09/27/king-netanyahu-visits-us-colony/

    This stuff is hilarious…..two gentile seniles, der Trumster and La Clinton, bump heads going for the zipper of the sleazy furniture salesman from Philly. You should be damn happy Israel exists as otherwise we would have another 8 million relentlessly awful jooies over here to deal with……..think about it…..scary thought, huh?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rehmat
    I hate to wake you up from your dream, but .....

    When there was no Israel - Western Christians had control over Jewish communities living amongst them. After they dumped their centuries-old JEWISH PROBLEM on to Palestinian Muslims and Christians - now the same Jews rule the entire Western Christian world.

    Initially, a great majority of British Jews were against the creation a ‘Jewish homeland’ on an Arab land. However, British hardcore Christian Zionist leaders, such as, Lord Balfour, Lord Shaftesburry and Lolyd George were driven by their ‘messianic fantasy’ that once a great majority of world Jewry assemble in the Holy Land (Palestine), it will usher the second-coming of Christ. Over 65 million evangelic Christian still believe that when Christ appears he will convert Jews to Christianity in the Holy Land and the ones who refuse to convert would be put to death.

    The distorted interpretation of the Jewish Bible (OT) has been and still remains central to Western support for the Zionist entity. This support has generated over $3 trillion American aid to Israel since 1970s excluding $3 billion annual military aid and over 38 American vetoes at the UNSC to protect the Zionist entity being dragged to some international body on charges of war crimes.

    https://rehmat1.com/2014/09/17/israel-was-created-to-solve-europes-jewish-problem/
  45. BB753 says:
    @CanSpeccy

    The most likely explanation indeed is that the towers were previously wired for demolition and that it was part of a contingency plan independent of the attacks, because of the external steel structure of the buildings.
     
    Oh, sure. And all the other high-rise buildings in the world are pre-wired for demolition too, no doubt.

    But then why's it such a big secret, since it provides the perfectly innocent explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers? And Why the BS from NIST about the heat of the fires melting the steel?

    It’s not innocent in that families of victims could sue. Was demolition necessary?
    As for the bs explanation of the fires melting the steel, of course it was a cover-up. They couldn’t go ahead and say: “there was a 40% possibility of either tower or both toppling down so we took the decision to blow them up. So sue us! And the exoskeleton might have been at fault too, it didn’t prove totally plane-proof. Go sue the constructor. Also the FBI and aiport security totally screwed up, as did the Air Force and the Pentagon. No, we don’t know who did it or why and don’t really care. “

    Read More
  46. eD says:
    @CanSpeccy

    It’s plausible NY authorities decided to demolish them to avoid further destruction and casualties. Of course, authorities would never admit to that.
     
    But for the authorities to demolish the Twin Towers within a hour or two of their being struck by planes would require that the buildings be wired for demolition in advance, i.e., it would prove foreknowledge of the attack, which is exactly what any sensible person is bound to conclude if they study the evidence.

    And we know that WT7 was pre-wired for demolition because it came down at free-fall speed into its own footprint without being hit by a plane, so from that fact alone, it can be concluded with near certainty that WTC1 and 2 were pre-wired for demolition.

    “But for the authorities to demolish the Twin Towers within a hour or two of their being struck by planes would require that the buildings be wired for demolition in advance, i.e., it would prove foreknowledge of the attack, which is exactly what any sensible person is bound to conclude if they study the evidence.”

    They did have foreknowledge of the attack, or at least the possibility of an attack. There was an attempt to bring the towers down in 1993. The authorities were well aware after 1993 at least that the twin towers were a likely terrorist target.

    Plus when the towers originally constructed, they were the tallest buildings in the world and used a novel design. Every effort was made to ensure that they could withstand being hit by a commercial airliner (this doesn’t meant that they could, its just that people were well aware of the possibility and tried to deal with it). A small plane in fact hit the empire state building. There is also always the risk of New York getting hit by a hurricane, which in fact actually happened recently, with the part of Manhattan where the World Trade Center is being hit particularly badly.

    So there was no need for inside information to realize that there was a possibility that something would cause these things to topple over. Now that is an argument against building buildings this tall in the first place, but one counter-measure would be to pre-wire them for demolition, so they could be brought down into their footprints if it looked like there was a possibility of their toppling, though probably the expectation was that everyone in the buildings would be evacuated first.

    The other buildings in the complex contained various sensitive government/ deep state stuff and would be pre-wired so that if they caught on fire, they could be brought down so you wouldn’t have non-vetted people going through them and finding stuff there. Building 7 was physically outside the complex and adjacent to other buildings, creating the issue of any fire from that building spreading as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    Bafflegab.

    You said the buildings were "wired for demolition [in advance of 9/11] and that this was in conformity with a contingency plan" independent of the 9/11 attacks, which is nuts. It implies that the buildings were highly unstable which we know they were not, and if they had been, then there would surely have been an inquiry to determine how to stabilize them, and all similar steel high-rise buildings. But of course there was nothing of the kind.

    As for pulling the buildings after they had been hit by planes to prevent them toppling over, you think they'd do that without first telling the fire-fighters to get out?

    Your idea is so crazy not even a conspiracy nut would consider it seriously.
  47. map says:
    @CanSpeccy

    It’s plausible NY authorities decided to demolish them to avoid further destruction and casualties. Of course, authorities would never admit to that.
     
    But for the authorities to demolish the Twin Towers within a hour or two of their being struck by planes would require that the buildings be wired for demolition in advance, i.e., it would prove foreknowledge of the attack, which is exactly what any sensible person is bound to conclude if they study the evidence.

    And we know that WT7 was pre-wired for demolition because it came down at free-fall speed into its own footprint without being hit by a plane, so from that fact alone, it can be concluded with near certainty that WTC1 and 2 were pre-wired for demolition.

    Pre-wiring a skyscraper to blow in the event of some accident or weather anomaly seems like a good idea. Equally, maybe skyscrapers are not as strong as we think they are. We know, for example, that they are not perfectly rigid. They do sway in strong winds, by several feet.

    For all we know, this is a dirty little secret of skyscraper design. A skyscraper falling over like a tree and taking down everything in its path would be the biggest disaster in history. Consequently, the design has to make sure that it collapses within its own footprint, either structural weaknesses are built in or the building is pre-wired to blow. It’s a sound precaution, but imagine the general public knowing that they are essentially living and working in vulnerable death traps.

    The building was probably brought down due to design and pre-wiring but the public simply does not know about these precautions.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Boris

    Pre-wiring a skyscraper to blow in the event of some accident or weather anomaly seems like a good idea.
     
    No. No. No. No. A million "No"s wouldn't adequately communicate how wrong this is. No.


    maybe skyscrapers are not as strong as we think they are. We know, for example, that they are not perfectly rigid. They do sway in strong winds, by several feet.
     
    That is by design and makes them stronger.

    For all we know, this is a dirty little secret of skyscraper design.
     
    No.

    A skyscraper falling over like a tree and taking down everything in its path would be the biggest disaster in history.
     
    No.


    Consequently, the design has to make sure that it collapses within its own footprint
     
    Buildings are designed NOT to fall down, which is generally why they don't.

    either structural weaknesses are built in or the building is pre-wired to blow.
     
    Nope.


    It’s a sound precaution
     
    Please don't ever design buildings. I beg you.
    , @edNels
    That's an idea and maybe there might be something to it, like having a safety device. It could be similar to what they put into the modern automobile. The fenders and body parts are tested to crunch in certain ways, to absorb energy from a crash, and hopefully to protect the passengers.

    Lots of things like an out board motor for a boat, has a ''shear pin'' built in so that the propeller and shaft won't break everytime you hit a log or rock.

    I mean it is pretty logical, maybe a little cynical too , but much as they had to deliberate and fret over the decision, when the order to Pull, was gotten, everybody in the chain of command, seemed to jump into formation, no questions.

    Maybe they do kill horses'', oh, maybe buildings do have built in Doomsday proceedures. Don't think so! Must remember those Firemen that didn't get the word, and those doors to the roof that were locked.

    Someday this story will make the Titanic disaster pale in comparison.
  48. @Lawrence Fitton
    space aliens from the crab nebula destroyed the towers with gravity wave synthesizers. i saw it on fox news, it has to be true.

    You can’t even find the Shift key.

    Read More
  49. Look carefully at the photo and realize what you are seeing. That is the lobby area of one of the buildings. It should be buried in rubble mounded over a hundred feet high. Gravity pulls things straight down, not out to the sides, yet all the debris is spread around and the core columns which were the strongest part of the building are completely gone.

    This was not a gravity driven collapse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus
    On the TW800 thread, you said;

    One proof that planes hit the building is that they rocked back and forth in a manner consistent with having been struck by large airplanes traveling at high speed
     
    Interesting. I haven't encountered this before, so I tried some searches but without success. I would be much obliged if you have a link you can point me to.
  50. Rehmat says:
    @nsa
    This stuff is hilarious.....two gentile seniles, der Trumster and La Clinton, bump heads going for the zipper of the sleazy furniture salesman from Philly. You should be damn happy Israel exists as otherwise we would have another 8 million relentlessly awful jooies over here to deal with........think about it.....scary thought, huh?

    I hate to wake you up from your dream, but …..

    When there was no Israel – Western Christians had control over Jewish communities living amongst them. After they dumped their centuries-old JEWISH PROBLEM on to Palestinian Muslims and Christians – now the same Jews rule the entire Western Christian world.

    Initially, a great majority of British Jews were against the creation a ‘Jewish homeland’ on an Arab land. However, British hardcore Christian Zionist leaders, such as, Lord Balfour, Lord Shaftesburry and Lolyd George were driven by their ‘messianic fantasy’ that once a great majority of world Jewry assemble in the Holy Land (Palestine), it will usher the second-coming of Christ. Over 65 million evangelic Christian still believe that when Christ appears he will convert Jews to Christianity in the Holy Land and the ones who refuse to convert would be put to death.

    The distorted interpretation of the Jewish Bible (OT) has been and still remains central to Western support for the Zionist entity. This support has generated over $3 trillion American aid to Israel since 1970s excluding $3 billion annual military aid and over 38 American vetoes at the UNSC to protect the Zionist entity being dragged to some international body on charges of war crimes.

    https://rehmat1.com/2014/09/17/israel-was-created-to-solve-europes-jewish-problem/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stonehands
    ... That's no interpretation, Rehmat, that's OT and NT fact...

    Genesis 16:12
    "He will be a wild donkey of a man, His hand will be against everyone, And everyone's hand will be against him; And he will live to the east of all his brothers."


    Many potentates among the Abyssinians, Persians, Egyptians, and Turks, have endeavored to subjugate the wandering or wild Arabs; but, though they have had temporary triumphs, they have been ultimately unsuccessful. Sesostris, Cyrus, Pompey, and Trajan, all endeavored to conquer Arabia, but in vain. From the beginning to the present day they have maintained their independence, and God preserves them as a lasting monument of his providential care, and an incontestable argument of the truth of Divine Revelation. Had the Pentateuch no other argument to evince its Divine origin, the account of Ishmael and the prophecy concerning his descendants, collated with their history and manner of life during a period of nearly four thousand years, would be sufficient. Indeed the argument is so absolutely demonstrative, that the man who would attempt its refutation, in the sight of reason and common sense would stand convicted of the most ridiculous presumption and folly.
  51. Boris says:
    @utu
    "The answer is: with enough acceleration."

    Acceleration has nothing to do with it. The planes had close to zero acceleration when impacted the buildings.

    Velocity!

    I was going to write velocity, but acceleration is technically correct. The energy comes from the impact’s deceleration, which is the same as acceleration in physics. It’s the change in velocity that matters (F=ma.).

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "I was going to write velocity, but acceleration is technically correct. "

    This comment you wrote tells me more about your pathetic personality than all the other comments put together.

  52. Boris says:
    @map
    Pre-wiring a skyscraper to blow in the event of some accident or weather anomaly seems like a good idea. Equally, maybe skyscrapers are not as strong as we think they are. We know, for example, that they are not perfectly rigid. They do sway in strong winds, by several feet.

    For all we know, this is a dirty little secret of skyscraper design. A skyscraper falling over like a tree and taking down everything in its path would be the biggest disaster in history. Consequently, the design has to make sure that it collapses within its own footprint, either structural weaknesses are built in or the building is pre-wired to blow. It's a sound precaution, but imagine the general public knowing that they are essentially living and working in vulnerable death traps.

    The building was probably brought down due to design and pre-wiring but the public simply does not know about these precautions.

    Pre-wiring a skyscraper to blow in the event of some accident or weather anomaly seems like a good idea.

    No. No. No. No. A million “No”s wouldn’t adequately communicate how wrong this is. No.

    maybe skyscrapers are not as strong as we think they are. We know, for example, that they are not perfectly rigid. They do sway in strong winds, by several feet.

    That is by design and makes them stronger.

    For all we know, this is a dirty little secret of skyscraper design.

    No.

    A skyscraper falling over like a tree and taking down everything in its path would be the biggest disaster in history.

    No.

    Consequently, the design has to make sure that it collapses within its own footprint

    Buildings are designed NOT to fall down, which is generally why they don’t.

    either structural weaknesses are built in or the building is pre-wired to blow.

    Nope.

    It’s a sound precaution

    Please don’t ever design buildings. I beg you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    Since you seem well informed, I'd like to ask you if you have ever considered that the Twin Towers were structurally defective?
    What is your theory?
  53. No_0ne says:
    @Jason Liu
    Interesting. Kinda surprised how the media hasn't hit him much on the trutherism. To me, believing in conspiracy theories is a greater demerit for the presidency than racism or sexism, but I guess I'm weird.

    “…believing in conspiracy theories is a greater demerit…”

    So you believe that the Twin Towers were brought down by one man, acting alone?

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    Yes, I had hopes of Jason Liu, a sensible conservative person, I thought. But he has now revealed himself to be a media-mind-controlled zombie. Pity.
  54. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @eD
    "But for the authorities to demolish the Twin Towers within a hour or two of their being struck by planes would require that the buildings be wired for demolition in advance, i.e., it would prove foreknowledge of the attack, which is exactly what any sensible person is bound to conclude if they study the evidence."

    They did have foreknowledge of the attack, or at least the possibility of an attack. There was an attempt to bring the towers down in 1993. The authorities were well aware after 1993 at least that the twin towers were a likely terrorist target.

    Plus when the towers originally constructed, they were the tallest buildings in the world and used a novel design. Every effort was made to ensure that they could withstand being hit by a commercial airliner (this doesn't meant that they could, its just that people were well aware of the possibility and tried to deal with it). A small plane in fact hit the empire state building. There is also always the risk of New York getting hit by a hurricane, which in fact actually happened recently, with the part of Manhattan where the World Trade Center is being hit particularly badly.

    So there was no need for inside information to realize that there was a possibility that something would cause these things to topple over. Now that is an argument against building buildings this tall in the first place, but one counter-measure would be to pre-wire them for demolition, so they could be brought down into their footprints if it looked like there was a possibility of their toppling, though probably the expectation was that everyone in the buildings would be evacuated first.

    The other buildings in the complex contained various sensitive government/ deep state stuff and would be pre-wired so that if they caught on fire, they could be brought down so you wouldn't have non-vetted people going through them and finding stuff there. Building 7 was physically outside the complex and adjacent to other buildings, creating the issue of any fire from that building spreading as well.

    Bafflegab.

    You said the buildings were “wired for demolition [in advance of 9/11] and that this was in conformity with a contingency plan” independent of the 9/11 attacks, which is nuts. It implies that the buildings were highly unstable which we know they were not, and if they had been, then there would surely have been an inquiry to determine how to stabilize them, and all similar steel high-rise buildings. But of course there was nothing of the kind.

    As for pulling the buildings after they had been hit by planes to prevent them toppling over, you think they’d do that without first telling the fire-fighters to get out?

    Your idea is so crazy not even a conspiracy nut would consider it seriously.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    "It implies that the buildings were highly unstable which we know they were not, and if they had been, then there would surely have been an inquiry to determine how to stabilize them, and all similar steel high-rise buildings."

    That's begging the question. There'd be no need for a cover-up if the buildings had been tested for stability.
    Since the Twin Towers are no more, I guess you could venture to say that they were not very stable, to put it mildly.

    "As for pulling the buildings after they had been hit by planes to prevent them toppling over, you think they’d do that without first telling the fire-fighters to get out?"

    Why not? One more reason not to tell the truth about the controlled demolition.
  55. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @No_0ne
    "...believing in conspiracy theories is a greater demerit..."

    So you believe that the Twin Towers were brought down by one man, acting alone?

    Yes, I had hopes of Jason Liu, a sensible conservative person, I thought. But he has now revealed himself to be a media-mind-controlled zombie. Pity.

    Read More
  56. BB753 says:
    @Boris

    Pre-wiring a skyscraper to blow in the event of some accident or weather anomaly seems like a good idea.
     
    No. No. No. No. A million "No"s wouldn't adequately communicate how wrong this is. No.


    maybe skyscrapers are not as strong as we think they are. We know, for example, that they are not perfectly rigid. They do sway in strong winds, by several feet.
     
    That is by design and makes them stronger.

    For all we know, this is a dirty little secret of skyscraper design.
     
    No.

    A skyscraper falling over like a tree and taking down everything in its path would be the biggest disaster in history.
     
    No.


    Consequently, the design has to make sure that it collapses within its own footprint
     
    Buildings are designed NOT to fall down, which is generally why they don't.

    either structural weaknesses are built in or the building is pre-wired to blow.
     
    Nope.


    It’s a sound precaution
     
    Please don't ever design buildings. I beg you.

    Since you seem well informed, I’d like to ask you if you have ever considered that the Twin Towers were structurally defective?
    What is your theory?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boris

    I’d like to ask you if you have ever considered that the Twin Towers were structurally defective?
     
    I have no idea. It's possible.
  57. edNels says:

    “I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel. I think, obviously, they were very big planes. They were going very rapidly, because I was also watching where the plane seemed to be not only going fast, it seemed to be coming down into the building. So it’s getting the speed from going down hill, so to speak. ..]”

    Trump has skills, but his skills of that type that are emblematic of the American business tycoon of late times, namely people skills and ability to creatively deflect, dissemble and prevaricate like a whorling Dervish, and to to intimidate others out of the way, and to manipulate with genious.

    But I just bet he’d have a hard time to build anything with his own small hands. My prejudice is that people skills are apportioned or developed at a cost, directly inverse to mechanical aptitude and spacial apperception.

    I guess he could be cut some slack for extemporaneous speaking at that hectic time, who really had much of an idea immediately? Although there was plenty of reason to be skeptical at the beginning, it didn’t quite look right.

    Supposedly Winston Churchill liked to lay bricks for relaxation, it’s opposite to political work.

    Now slightly off topic per Lin’s article, my response to the idea that there might have been a nuclear device/s used. Which I find ridiculous, along with anything ”free energy”or the like.

    The free energy people like to cite the complete decomposition of ”concrete” as to seal the deal that it be more than just the usual ”garden variety” implosion. (A Rose is still just a Rose…) gardening talk.

    _________________________

    I had to move this response from another article, where it was prompted yesterday. I know these are subjects don’t invite much humor, so all the more reason . However some folks like to talk about how impossible it was that the concrete was made to dust. Bringing in unknown tech like ”free energy” and even thinking nuclear would have been used. The commenter who is very good mostly, but his term, Mature Concrete, in that context that it would be too formidable to have done what it did.

    When the nuclear explanation floats, I wonder how it could be kept under wraps, with all those New York science High School wannabe physists running around with butterfly nets…(strike through that…) Gagger counters, no way.

    My conversations with construction guys years ago, and a night school construction tech course, tells me, that the concrete rendered to dust, was not ”mature concrete”, but was what is known as ”light weight concrete”, and has very little structural strength, as compressive, much less tensile. LW concrete is a leveler, pored onto steel pans that make up the floors. It would disintegrate with no help other than the deflection from collapse. On a par with sheet rock but more dense obviously.

    Thinking that there must be something exotic beyond normal demolition tools used by the pro’s all time like thermite, not really. Concrete venders have a reputation to keep up, and they would skimp on the product like that.

    Light Weight Concrete for floor leveling, its full of expanded rock, full of air. You wouldn’t be smart to put heavy Mature concrete like used on sidewalks up thousands of feet up, no point, bad engineering. That would be ”immature” to the max!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus

    ...”light weight concrete”, and has very little structural strength, as compressive, much less tensile
     
    Well, there's lightweight concrete, and then there's lightweight concrete.

    Standard concrete has a typical density of ~2400kg/CBM, with typical compressive strengths ranging from 20MPa, up to very high compressive strengths used for bunkers. The entire core structure utilized such "normal" concrete.
    The "lightweight concrete" used for the occupancy floors in the WTC, from what I could find in the documentation, had a density of ~1750kg/CBM. Though I couldn't find any specs for compressive strength, I would assume it was at the lower end of the above scale. Certainly, it is not difficult to make a 1750kg/CBM concrete of 20-30MPa, which is more than adequate for office floor duty.
    Anyhow, the statement that


    It would disintegrate with no help other than the deflection from collapse.
     
    is simply false.

    1750kg/CBM concrete is more expensive due to the lack of cheap heavy stone aggregate, but it can be readily achieved with the use of lighter weight sand and aggregate. There would be no need to go to aeration, though fillers such as expanded vermiculite, perlite, pumice and/or others may have been used, they would be required to make up little more than say 10-15% of the mix.
    I haven't seen any literature suggesting aeration was used, and it would also be a rather cutting edge thing to do at the time as foaming agent technology didn't become commercially available until the late '70s.

    Concrete, no matter its compressive strength, has poor tensile strength, and is typically quite brittle. This why rebar is used, even when "fully supported" as in a garage floor. Without it, any concrete will break if significant tensile stress is applied.

    The hydrolysis reaction of this class of lightweight concretes is very similar to normal concretes, so turning it to dust requires, pro rata, a similar amount of energy.

    Recently, advances in concrete chemistry have allowed very/ultra lightweight concretes to be formulated, but they're not to be found in the Twin Towers.

  58. utu says:
    @Boris
    I was going to write velocity, but acceleration is technically correct. The energy comes from the impact's deceleration, which is the same as acceleration in physics. It's the change in velocity that matters (F=ma.).

    “I was going to write velocity, but acceleration is technically correct. ”

    This comment you wrote tells me more about your pathetic personality than all the other comments put together.

    Read More
  59. While I don’t know what to believe about 9/11, I know enough to know what not to believe, and it’s the standard mythology regarding it.

    I also applaud LD on another fine article and for digging up the Trump quote. Very interesting stuff.

    Read More
  60. Boris says:
    @BB753
    Since you seem well informed, I'd like to ask you if you have ever considered that the Twin Towers were structurally defective?
    What is your theory?

    I’d like to ask you if you have ever considered that the Twin Towers were structurally defective?

    I have no idea. It’s possible.

    Read More
  61. prusmc says:
    @MMM
    Excellent article (as usual) by a brilliant writer with genuine integrity.

    Telling it like it is: "Craving to be president, Trump must kowtow to the Jewish neo-cons and Israel. Far from being an America-first nativist, Trump will continue that Beltway tradition of destroying America financially, politically and even spiritually, all to prop up Israel."

    Hope is all we have now for the immediate future. Let's hope it turns out better than this - if it doesn't, we've had it. Bound and gagged for "Israel" and its mafia.

    Until we manage in time to free ourselves - the drama is ongoing. No destruction is final.

    And HRC will be indebted to no one and let the chips fall where they may and the truth will make us free.

    Read More
  62. BB753 says:
    @CanSpeccy
    Bafflegab.

    You said the buildings were "wired for demolition [in advance of 9/11] and that this was in conformity with a contingency plan" independent of the 9/11 attacks, which is nuts. It implies that the buildings were highly unstable which we know they were not, and if they had been, then there would surely have been an inquiry to determine how to stabilize them, and all similar steel high-rise buildings. But of course there was nothing of the kind.

    As for pulling the buildings after they had been hit by planes to prevent them toppling over, you think they'd do that without first telling the fire-fighters to get out?

    Your idea is so crazy not even a conspiracy nut would consider it seriously.

    “It implies that the buildings were highly unstable which we know they were not, and if they had been, then there would surely have been an inquiry to determine how to stabilize them, and all similar steel high-rise buildings.”

    That’s begging the question. There’d be no need for a cover-up if the buildings had been tested for stability.
    Since the Twin Towers are no more, I guess you could venture to say that they were not very stable, to put it mildly.

    “As for pulling the buildings after they had been hit by planes to prevent them toppling over, you think they’d do that without first telling the fire-fighters to get out?”

    Why not? One more reason not to tell the truth about the controlled demolition.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    That’s begging the question. There’d be no need for a cover-up if the buildings had been tested for stability.
     
    But they had been tested for stability: the 1993 bombing of the North Tower with a 1200 pound truck bomb that caused reinforced floors almost 30 inches thick to be blasted away on 3 levels below grade, plus a concourse level floor, leaving a crater about 150 feet in diameter at it's largest point.
  63. Rehmat,

    Since you can really help well meaning & intelligent people “wake up from dreams,” I want to show you the interview (below) featuring Mike Papantonio who exercised a rather solid process of “discovery” and drilled down into Barack Obama and big Banks , i.e. Bank of America, and emphasized “… for banks terrorism is business.”

    Will you consider making a comment on the Mr. Papanttonio’s viewpoints? Otherwise, thank you for all the “free” (non-invoiced) education.

    Read More
  64. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @BB753
    "It implies that the buildings were highly unstable which we know they were not, and if they had been, then there would surely have been an inquiry to determine how to stabilize them, and all similar steel high-rise buildings."

    That's begging the question. There'd be no need for a cover-up if the buildings had been tested for stability.
    Since the Twin Towers are no more, I guess you could venture to say that they were not very stable, to put it mildly.

    "As for pulling the buildings after they had been hit by planes to prevent them toppling over, you think they’d do that without first telling the fire-fighters to get out?"

    Why not? One more reason not to tell the truth about the controlled demolition.

    That’s begging the question. There’d be no need for a cover-up if the buildings had been tested for stability.

    But they had been tested for stability: the 1993 bombing of the North Tower with a 1200 pound truck bomb that caused reinforced floors almost 30 inches thick to be blasted away on 3 levels below grade, plus a concourse level floor, leaving a crater about 150 feet in diameter at it’s largest point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    Lol! A botched terrorist bombing causing no structural damage is not a stress test.
  65. @Rehmat
    I hate to wake you up from your dream, but .....

    When there was no Israel - Western Christians had control over Jewish communities living amongst them. After they dumped their centuries-old JEWISH PROBLEM on to Palestinian Muslims and Christians - now the same Jews rule the entire Western Christian world.

    Initially, a great majority of British Jews were against the creation a ‘Jewish homeland’ on an Arab land. However, British hardcore Christian Zionist leaders, such as, Lord Balfour, Lord Shaftesburry and Lolyd George were driven by their ‘messianic fantasy’ that once a great majority of world Jewry assemble in the Holy Land (Palestine), it will usher the second-coming of Christ. Over 65 million evangelic Christian still believe that when Christ appears he will convert Jews to Christianity in the Holy Land and the ones who refuse to convert would be put to death.

    The distorted interpretation of the Jewish Bible (OT) has been and still remains central to Western support for the Zionist entity. This support has generated over $3 trillion American aid to Israel since 1970s excluding $3 billion annual military aid and over 38 American vetoes at the UNSC to protect the Zionist entity being dragged to some international body on charges of war crimes.

    https://rehmat1.com/2014/09/17/israel-was-created-to-solve-europes-jewish-problem/

    … That’s no interpretation, Rehmat, that’s OT and NT fact…

    Genesis 16:12
    “He will be a wild donkey of a man, His hand will be against everyone, And everyone’s hand will be against him; And he will live to the east of all his brothers.”

    Many potentates among the Abyssinians, Persians, Egyptians, and Turks, have endeavored to subjugate the wandering or wild Arabs; but, though they have had temporary triumphs, they have been ultimately unsuccessful. Sesostris, Cyrus, Pompey, and Trajan, all endeavored to conquer Arabia, but in vain. From the beginning to the present day they have maintained their independence, and God preserves them as a lasting monument of his providential care, and an incontestable argument of the truth of Divine Revelation. Had the Pentateuch no other argument to evince its Divine origin, the account of Ishmael and the prophecy concerning his descendants, collated with their history and manner of life during a period of nearly four thousand years, would be sufficient. Indeed the argument is so absolutely demonstrative, that the man who would attempt its refutation, in the sight of reason and common sense would stand convicted of the most ridiculous presumption and folly.

    Read More
  66. Hacienda says:

    Trump is a developer and self-promoter, that doesn’t mean he’s an expert on building construction or architecture. If fact, someone of his background would do well not to waste his time learning these things and delegate this area to expert advisors.

    Anyone who saw the planes enter the buildings, leaving a silhouette outline like you see when Wile E. Coyote goes through a door, can see it had nothing to do with explosives, unless the explosives were lined through the tips of the wings (a preposterous idea). That Trump would even posit such a stupid idea amidst his usual vapid generalizations shows for the umpteenth time he’s in over his head. Arrogance, insecurity, stubbornness, and mediocrity mixed all up with the 5 of 7 deadly sins. It’s his vanity that keeps him from being a glutton, his lust that keeps him from sloth.

    Don’t be a boot-licker, LD.

    Read More
  67. Erebus says:
    @edNels

    “I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel. I think, obviously, they were very big planes. They were going very rapidly, because I was also watching where the plane seemed to be not only going fast, it seemed to be coming down into the building. So it’s getting the speed from going down hill, so to speak. ..]"
     
    Trump has skills, but his skills of that type that are emblematic of the American business tycoon of late times, namely people skills and ability to creatively deflect, dissemble and prevaricate like a whorling Dervish, and to to intimidate others out of the way, and to manipulate with genious.

    But I just bet he'd have a hard time to build anything with his own small hands. My prejudice is that people skills are apportioned or developed at a cost, directly inverse to mechanical aptitude and spacial apperception.

    I guess he could be cut some slack for extemporaneous speaking at that hectic time, who really had much of an idea immediately? Although there was plenty of reason to be skeptical at the beginning, it didn't quite look right.

    Supposedly Winston Churchill liked to lay bricks for relaxation, it's opposite to political work.

    Now slightly off topic per Lin's article, my response to the idea that there might have been a nuclear device/s used. Which I find ridiculous, along with anything ''free energy''or the like.

    The free energy people like to cite the complete decomposition of ''concrete'' as to seal the deal that it be more than just the usual ''garden variety'' implosion. (A Rose is still just a Rose...) gardening talk.

    _________________________


    I had to move this response from another article, where it was prompted yesterday. I know these are subjects don't invite much humor, so all the more reason . However some folks like to talk about how impossible it was that the concrete was made to dust. Bringing in unknown tech like ''free energy'' and even thinking nuclear would have been used. The commenter who is very good mostly, but his term, Mature Concrete, in that context that it would be too formidable to have done what it did.

    When the nuclear explanation floats, I wonder how it could be kept under wraps, with all those New York science High School wannabe physists running around with butterfly nets…(strike through that…) Gagger counters, no way.

    My conversations with construction guys years ago, and a night school construction tech course, tells me, that the concrete rendered to dust, was not ''mature concrete'', but was what is known as ''light weight concrete'', and has very little structural strength, as compressive, much less tensile. LW concrete is a leveler, pored onto steel pans that make up the floors. It would disintegrate with no help other than the deflection from collapse. On a par with sheet rock but more dense obviously.

    Thinking that there must be something exotic beyond normal demolition tools used by the pro's all time like thermite, not really. Concrete venders have a reputation to keep up, and they would skimp on the product like that.

    Light Weight Concrete for floor leveling, its full of expanded rock, full of air. You wouldn't be smart to put heavy Mature concrete like used on sidewalks up thousands of feet up, no point, bad engineering. That would be ''immature'' to the max!

    …”light weight concrete”, and has very little structural strength, as compressive, much less tensile

    Well, there’s lightweight concrete, and then there’s lightweight concrete.

    Standard concrete has a typical density of ~2400kg/CBM, with typical compressive strengths ranging from 20MPa, up to very high compressive strengths used for bunkers. The entire core structure utilized such “normal” concrete.
    The “lightweight concrete” used for the occupancy floors in the WTC, from what I could find in the documentation, had a density of ~1750kg/CBM. Though I couldn’t find any specs for compressive strength, I would assume it was at the lower end of the above scale. Certainly, it is not difficult to make a 1750kg/CBM concrete of 20-30MPa, which is more than adequate for office floor duty.
    Anyhow, the statement that

    It would disintegrate with no help other than the deflection from collapse.

    is simply false.

    1750kg/CBM concrete is more expensive due to the lack of cheap heavy stone aggregate, but it can be readily achieved with the use of lighter weight sand and aggregate. There would be no need to go to aeration, though fillers such as expanded vermiculite, perlite, pumice and/or others may have been used, they would be required to make up little more than say 10-15% of the mix.
    I haven’t seen any literature suggesting aeration was used, and it would also be a rather cutting edge thing to do at the time as foaming agent technology didn’t become commercially available until the late ’70s.

    Concrete, no matter its compressive strength, has poor tensile strength, and is typically quite brittle. This why rebar is used, even when “fully supported” as in a garage floor. Without it, any concrete will break if significant tensile stress is applied.

    The hydrolysis reaction of this class of lightweight concretes is very similar to normal concretes, so turning it to dust requires, pro rata, a similar amount of energy.

    Recently, advances in concrete chemistry have allowed very/ultra lightweight concretes to be formulated, but they’re not to be found in the Twin Towers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @edNels
    Thanks for the detailed response. I was pretty sure that most of the dust was from the special concrete used to level the floors, and that it, is of much poorer quality than, ''mature'' concrete, like used in structural applications. And to digress to the point of the quality of that substance, maybe it was substandard, though as a filler to level the floors, maybe it did it job and was good enough, only thing being, that in a collapse, it wouldn't be up to its ''reputation'' and would be more than easily disintegrated, and thereby point the finger to a need for explanation, beyond simple collapse, and physical disintegration, to these really weird ideas of nuclear and/or focused Free Energy, or whatever from Dr. Woods bats in the belfrey concept, which is unknown to anybody, or has never been demonstrated,

    How do you put nuclear reactions into the plan? I mean for a start, a nuclear detonation is usually a fission, and is an implosion to gain critical mass to cause the chain reaction so that really huge no. s of mouse traps give up their ping pong balls, in ever increasing... (expontially) no's (so to say) and you have a super chemical reaction, where the atoms lose an electron and ''split'' giving of energy. but that is at a point in space, don't see how that helps, they have a use if it is to destroy alright, but are not esteemed for their use in close quarters nor for fine work, such as taking out particular things like the floor concrete. and it would be impossible to hide
    the nuc pollution.

    Can you tell where or how any or several smallish nuclear devices could even aid in pulverizing about 100 acres of floors?

    I still go with the simple fact that in the fall of debris, and be it understood, it's not random, it is not just falling, but is imploding, along certain predetermined...''blueprinted'' lines. It's key to get that point.
  68. edNels says:
    @Erebus

    ...”light weight concrete”, and has very little structural strength, as compressive, much less tensile
     
    Well, there's lightweight concrete, and then there's lightweight concrete.

    Standard concrete has a typical density of ~2400kg/CBM, with typical compressive strengths ranging from 20MPa, up to very high compressive strengths used for bunkers. The entire core structure utilized such "normal" concrete.
    The "lightweight concrete" used for the occupancy floors in the WTC, from what I could find in the documentation, had a density of ~1750kg/CBM. Though I couldn't find any specs for compressive strength, I would assume it was at the lower end of the above scale. Certainly, it is not difficult to make a 1750kg/CBM concrete of 20-30MPa, which is more than adequate for office floor duty.
    Anyhow, the statement that


    It would disintegrate with no help other than the deflection from collapse.
     
    is simply false.

    1750kg/CBM concrete is more expensive due to the lack of cheap heavy stone aggregate, but it can be readily achieved with the use of lighter weight sand and aggregate. There would be no need to go to aeration, though fillers such as expanded vermiculite, perlite, pumice and/or others may have been used, they would be required to make up little more than say 10-15% of the mix.
    I haven't seen any literature suggesting aeration was used, and it would also be a rather cutting edge thing to do at the time as foaming agent technology didn't become commercially available until the late '70s.

    Concrete, no matter its compressive strength, has poor tensile strength, and is typically quite brittle. This why rebar is used, even when "fully supported" as in a garage floor. Without it, any concrete will break if significant tensile stress is applied.

    The hydrolysis reaction of this class of lightweight concretes is very similar to normal concretes, so turning it to dust requires, pro rata, a similar amount of energy.

    Recently, advances in concrete chemistry have allowed very/ultra lightweight concretes to be formulated, but they're not to be found in the Twin Towers.

    Thanks for the detailed response. I was pretty sure that most of the dust was from the special concrete used to level the floors, and that it, is of much poorer quality than, ”mature” concrete, like used in structural applications. And to digress to the point of the quality of that substance, maybe it was substandard, though as a filler to level the floors, maybe it did it job and was good enough, only thing being, that in a collapse, it wouldn’t be up to its ”reputation” and would be more than easily disintegrated, and thereby point the finger to a need for explanation, beyond simple collapse, and physical disintegration, to these really weird ideas of nuclear and/or focused Free Energy, or whatever from Dr. Woods bats in the belfrey concept, which is unknown to anybody, or has never been demonstrated,

    How do you put nuclear reactions into the plan? I mean for a start, a nuclear detonation is usually a fission, and is an implosion to gain critical mass to cause the chain reaction so that really huge no. s of mouse traps give up their ping pong balls, in ever increasing… (expontially) no’s (so to say) and you have a super chemical reaction, where the atoms lose an electron and ”split” giving of energy. but that is at a point in space, don’t see how that helps, they have a use if it is to destroy alright, but are not esteemed for their use in close quarters nor for fine work, such as taking out particular things like the floor concrete. and it would be impossible to hide
    the nuc pollution.

    Can you tell where or how any or several smallish nuclear devices could even aid in pulverizing about 100 acres of floors?

    I still go with the simple fact that in the fall of debris, and be it understood, it’s not random, it is not just falling, but is imploding, along certain predetermined…”blueprinted” lines. It’s key to get that point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus
    If you're positing that the floor concrete was defective, then my answer would have to be that I have no idea. The architects would have specified the concrete for the purpose intended, and the batch plant (which may have been on site) would have to deliver concrete to the spec. NY's concrete market may well be very corrupt, but all large concrete projects involve continuous testing and it would have to be within reasonable tolerance or the architects would have every right to demand that it be removed.

    The building wasn't "imploding". The critical effect we saw is the concrete dust being expelled sideways, out of the building with high energy. It was exploding. Moreover, we see this from the very beginning of the collapse sequence, as the first floor just starts moving and when the kinetic energy levels are still very low. We didn't see chunks/slabs fly out, we saw masses of fine dust being ejected 30-40M. Like a volcano spewing ash.
    This occurred floor after floor for 100 floors in sequence. It was almost exactly the same in both buildings. If it happened only a few times, we could chalk it up to some organic confluence of factors. In that case, we'd say "Hmm, that's interesting" but we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. However, it happened virtually identically through 200 floors. That's the hallmark of an engineered process.

    Note also that the mass of high strength concrete (probably very high strength at lower levels) in the cores also disappeared. Normally, critically structural concrete is tested and certified, so I expect that the cores were rock solid. Yet, they too dissociated into dust.

    As for nukes... Along with quantum energy, directed energy etc, they're well above my pay grade. There are plenty of things that happened that day that look really weird, but I'd look long and hard for a "normal" explanation before jumping to exotic conclusions. I wouldn't venture to speculate on their effects on concrete, or how to use them to achieve the effects seen.
  69. edNels says:
    @map
    Pre-wiring a skyscraper to blow in the event of some accident or weather anomaly seems like a good idea. Equally, maybe skyscrapers are not as strong as we think they are. We know, for example, that they are not perfectly rigid. They do sway in strong winds, by several feet.

    For all we know, this is a dirty little secret of skyscraper design. A skyscraper falling over like a tree and taking down everything in its path would be the biggest disaster in history. Consequently, the design has to make sure that it collapses within its own footprint, either structural weaknesses are built in or the building is pre-wired to blow. It's a sound precaution, but imagine the general public knowing that they are essentially living and working in vulnerable death traps.

    The building was probably brought down due to design and pre-wiring but the public simply does not know about these precautions.

    That’s an idea and maybe there might be something to it, like having a safety device. It could be similar to what they put into the modern automobile. The fenders and body parts are tested to crunch in certain ways, to absorb energy from a crash, and hopefully to protect the passengers.

    Lots of things like an out board motor for a boat, has a ”shear pin” built in so that the propeller and shaft won’t break everytime you hit a log or rock.

    I mean it is pretty logical, maybe a little cynical too , but much as they had to deliberate and fret over the decision, when the order to Pull, was gotten, everybody in the chain of command, seemed to jump into formation, no questions.

    Maybe they do kill horses”, oh, maybe buildings do have built in Doomsday proceedures. Don’t think so! Must remember those Firemen that didn’t get the word, and those doors to the roof that were locked.

    Someday this story will make the Titanic disaster pale in comparison.

    Read More
  70. BB753 says:
    @CanSpeccy

    That’s begging the question. There’d be no need for a cover-up if the buildings had been tested for stability.
     
    But they had been tested for stability: the 1993 bombing of the North Tower with a 1200 pound truck bomb that caused reinforced floors almost 30 inches thick to be blasted away on 3 levels below grade, plus a concourse level floor, leaving a crater about 150 feet in diameter at it's largest point.

    Lol! A botched terrorist bombing causing no structural damage is not a stress test.

    Read More
  71. DaveE says:
    @Philoveritas
    I believe Trump when he says he could see the jumpers from four miles away. I saw a video online shot from New Jersey and you could see the jumpers, although the person behind the camera didn't quite understand what they were. The physics support that a plane travelling at that speed could indeed penetrate the steel, though it seems counter-intuitive...Think of how a lead bullet(a relatively soft metal) can penetrate many far more dense objects, speed multiplies force...Trump has to tow the party-line during the campaign, and their last desperate effort to shift the blame away from the Neo-Cons is the whole Saudi Arabia and the 28 pages canard...

    Counter-intuitive? More like moronic.

    Go get a gun, stand in front of a steel I-beam and shoot. The closer the better, to utilize the maximum inertia of the bullet.

    I triple-dog dare ya’.

    One less moron.

    Read More
  72. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Here’s an interesting video of the collapse of Building 7. It clearly shows the squibs of smoke from the windows on both sides of the building and over virtually the entire height of the building, the result of the explosions that would have been necessary to remove all supporting structures thus causing the building to go into free-fall for over two seconds (i.e., 30 meters or eight stories).

    Read More
  73. Erebus says:
    @Si1ver1ock
    Look carefully at the photo and realize what you are seeing. That is the lobby area of one of the buildings. It should be buried in rubble mounded over a hundred feet high. Gravity pulls things straight down, not out to the sides, yet all the debris is spread around and the core columns which were the strongest part of the building are completely gone.

    This was not a gravity driven collapse.

    On the TW800 thread, you said;

    One proof that planes hit the building is that they rocked back and forth in a manner consistent with having been struck by large airplanes traveling at high speed

    Interesting. I haven’t encountered this before, so I tried some searches but without success. I would be much obliged if you have a link you can point me to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Si1ver1ock
    The original documents seem to have disappeared from the web or at least from the search engines, but this video shows some of it. Someone measured it and that was how they determined that the buildings core structure was still intact. If you watch closely, you can eve see the jet flicker as it enters the building (lower left of building).

    Watch the upper right had corner closely and remember to account for the scale of the building.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHVDMJ7Dgzg

  74. Erebus says:
    @edNels
    Thanks for the detailed response. I was pretty sure that most of the dust was from the special concrete used to level the floors, and that it, is of much poorer quality than, ''mature'' concrete, like used in structural applications. And to digress to the point of the quality of that substance, maybe it was substandard, though as a filler to level the floors, maybe it did it job and was good enough, only thing being, that in a collapse, it wouldn't be up to its ''reputation'' and would be more than easily disintegrated, and thereby point the finger to a need for explanation, beyond simple collapse, and physical disintegration, to these really weird ideas of nuclear and/or focused Free Energy, or whatever from Dr. Woods bats in the belfrey concept, which is unknown to anybody, or has never been demonstrated,

    How do you put nuclear reactions into the plan? I mean for a start, a nuclear detonation is usually a fission, and is an implosion to gain critical mass to cause the chain reaction so that really huge no. s of mouse traps give up their ping pong balls, in ever increasing... (expontially) no's (so to say) and you have a super chemical reaction, where the atoms lose an electron and ''split'' giving of energy. but that is at a point in space, don't see how that helps, they have a use if it is to destroy alright, but are not esteemed for their use in close quarters nor for fine work, such as taking out particular things like the floor concrete. and it would be impossible to hide
    the nuc pollution.

    Can you tell where or how any or several smallish nuclear devices could even aid in pulverizing about 100 acres of floors?

    I still go with the simple fact that in the fall of debris, and be it understood, it's not random, it is not just falling, but is imploding, along certain predetermined...''blueprinted'' lines. It's key to get that point.

    If you’re positing that the floor concrete was defective, then my answer would have to be that I have no idea. The architects would have specified the concrete for the purpose intended, and the batch plant (which may have been on site) would have to deliver concrete to the spec. NY’s concrete market may well be very corrupt, but all large concrete projects involve continuous testing and it would have to be within reasonable tolerance or the architects would have every right to demand that it be removed.

    The building wasn’t “imploding”. The critical effect we saw is the concrete dust being expelled sideways, out of the building with high energy. It was exploding. Moreover, we see this from the very beginning of the collapse sequence, as the first floor just starts moving and when the kinetic energy levels are still very low. We didn’t see chunks/slabs fly out, we saw masses of fine dust being ejected 30-40M. Like a volcano spewing ash.
    This occurred floor after floor for 100 floors in sequence. It was almost exactly the same in both buildings. If it happened only a few times, we could chalk it up to some organic confluence of factors. In that case, we’d say “Hmm, that’s interesting” but we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion. However, it happened virtually identically through 200 floors. That’s the hallmark of an engineered process.

    Note also that the mass of high strength concrete (probably very high strength at lower levels) in the cores also disappeared. Normally, critically structural concrete is tested and certified, so I expect that the cores were rock solid. Yet, they too dissociated into dust.

    As for nukes… Along with quantum energy, directed energy etc, they’re well above my pay grade. There are plenty of things that happened that day that look really weird, but I’d look long and hard for a “normal” explanation before jumping to exotic conclusions. I wouldn’t venture to speculate on their effects on concrete, or how to use them to achieve the effects seen.

    Read More
  75. @Erebus
    On the TW800 thread, you said;

    One proof that planes hit the building is that they rocked back and forth in a manner consistent with having been struck by large airplanes traveling at high speed
     
    Interesting. I haven't encountered this before, so I tried some searches but without success. I would be much obliged if you have a link you can point me to.

    The original documents seem to have disappeared from the web or at least from the search engines, but this video shows some of it. Someone measured it and that was how they determined that the buildings core structure was still intact. If you watch closely, you can eve see the jet flicker as it enters the building (lower left of building).

    Watch the upper right had corner closely and remember to account for the scale of the building.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus
    Thanks for that.
    Yes, it seems quite a bit of material I remember has now vanished.
    Anyhow, my connection is rarely good enough to stream video, so I'll have to wait until I get to a better one before viewing.

    As a caution, one must also keep in mind that even without planes, the "impact explosions" would also rock the towers. At point of impact, the result should be roughly the same whether explosions bent the exterior columns inward or if airplanes did. The forces required are the same in both instances. Of course, if airplanes were involved the subsequent deceleration of mass inside the building would add to any rocking.

  76. Erebus says:

    Found this mentioned in the comments section on another blog, and thought it may be of interest to readers here.

    Agnotology, the study of ignorance applies to this article of course, but is perhaps even more fundamental to Mr. Unz’s American Pravda series.

    By way of introduction:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnotology

    Agnotology (formerly agnatology) is the study of culturally induced ignorance or doubt…”

    And the seminal work in this area:

    https://www.amazon.com/Agnotology-Unmaking-Ignorance-Robert-Proctor/dp/0804759014

    “What don’t we know, and why don’t we know it? What keeps ignorance alive, or allows it to be used as a political instrument?”

    Read More
  77. Erebus says:
    @Si1ver1ock
    The original documents seem to have disappeared from the web or at least from the search engines, but this video shows some of it. Someone measured it and that was how they determined that the buildings core structure was still intact. If you watch closely, you can eve see the jet flicker as it enters the building (lower left of building).

    Watch the upper right had corner closely and remember to account for the scale of the building.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHVDMJ7Dgzg

    Thanks for that.
    Yes, it seems quite a bit of material I remember has now vanished.
    Anyhow, my connection is rarely good enough to stream video, so I’ll have to wait until I get to a better one before viewing.

    As a caution, one must also keep in mind that even without planes, the “impact explosions” would also rock the towers. At point of impact, the result should be roughly the same whether explosions bent the exterior columns inward or if airplanes did. The forces required are the same in both instances. Of course, if airplanes were involved the subsequent deceleration of mass inside the building would add to any rocking.

    Read More
  78. In the video, you can see the plane enter one side of the building and then the building cants to the other side. It seems like a deceptively small deflection, but you must remember the mass of the building involved, both below and above the impact as well as the “stiffener” of the core columns.

    The building was designed to take an impact from a fully loaded passenger jet. The designer likened it to shoving a pencil through a window screen. The outer columns were like a screen tube, the inner core columns were much more dense and stronger.

    Remember, the Truthers are only asking for a proper investigation. If it turns out we are wrong, then so be it. But it doesn’t look that way. It really doesn’t. We are not just being a bunch of sh!tty jerks.

    A proper investigation would settle these issues.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus

    ...Truthers are only asking for a proper investigation... A proper investigation would settle these issues.
     
    9/11 is the splinter in the American hive mind that's driving it nuts. Truthers and believers alike know there's something rotten at the core of the narrative, and both sense it's big. The difference is that Believers say "We don't know the whole story" whereas Truthers say "We don't know any of the real story".
    Like a splinter in your foot, you can ignore it if you don't try to walk. Believers put their foot up. Truthers pick at the splinter.

    America needs a Truth Commission to extract the damn thing, but won't get one until the existing power structure is purged. It'll probably have to collapse before that happens.
  79. Old fogey says:
    @Greg Bacon
    Everyone always talks about WTC 1,2 and 7, but what about WTC 6, also destroyed on 9/11?

    What about the mysterious 9/11 explosion at WTC 6 that sent building fragments over 500 feet into the air? Before the smoke had cleared from around the stricken South Tower, a mysterious explosion shot 550 feet into the air above the U.S. Customs House at 6 World Trade Center. This unexplained blast at the Customs House has never been investigated or reported in the mainstream media.

    No plane hit WTC 6 and there was no fire, so what caused WTC 6 to explode from WITHIN the evening of 9/11?

    One could also mention that hundreds of millions of dollars of gold and silver bullion was stolen from the basement of WTC 4 the night BEFORE 9/11. Did Benjamin Laden and crew tire of visiting tittie bars, drinking copious amounts of booze, snorting cocaine, and leaving behind their Korans and get their kicks the night BEFORE 9/11 by stealing gold and silver bullion?

    Buildings 3, 4, and 5 also went down, while no building without a “WTC” designation in the ring of buildings surrounding the site crashed. The specificity was uncanny.

    Read More
  80. Erebus says:
    @Si1ver1ock
    In the video, you can see the plane enter one side of the building and then the building cants to the other side. It seems like a deceptively small deflection, but you must remember the mass of the building involved, both below and above the impact as well as the "stiffener" of the core columns.

    The building was designed to take an impact from a fully loaded passenger jet. The designer likened it to shoving a pencil through a window screen. The outer columns were like a screen tube, the inner core columns were much more dense and stronger.

    Remember, the Truthers are only asking for a proper investigation. If it turns out we are wrong, then so be it. But it doesn't look that way. It really doesn't. We are not just being a bunch of sh!tty jerks.

    A proper investigation would settle these issues.

    …Truthers are only asking for a proper investigation… A proper investigation would settle these issues.

    9/11 is the splinter in the American hive mind that’s driving it nuts. Truthers and believers alike know there’s something rotten at the core of the narrative, and both sense it’s big. The difference is that Believers say “We don’t know the whole story” whereas Truthers say “We don’t know any of the real story”.
    Like a splinter in your foot, you can ignore it if you don’t try to walk. Believers put their foot up. Truthers pick at the splinter.

    America needs a Truth Commission to extract the damn thing, but won’t get one until the existing power structure is purged. It’ll probably have to collapse before that happens.

    Read More
  81. Sam J. says:

    Trump has to know it’s an inside job. Question is he going to do anything about it? If he does we need to support him 100%. They will try to destroy him. We must stop them.

    Read More
  82. […] also: Trump and 9/11 – The Unz Review […]

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Linh Dinh Comments via RSS