The 9/11 Faith Movement

CHAD

Maybe didders just hasn’t looked that much at the videos.

A “professional” is someone who gets paid, which covers a lot of professions, including the oldest one.
An “expert” is someone who has qualifications, but none of them are necessarily in Honesty.

“Professional Experts” are systematically bought or otherwise suborned by the agro-chemical and pharmaceutical industries among others.

Professional Experts can be pressured by their employing governments to give false witness, or at least to remain silent., for fear of losing jobs and pensions .

WMDs anyone ?

Our resident shill tells us ---

And that point is:  Once the weight of the upper block was loosed upon the lower, by whatever exact mechanism, global collapse was inevitable due to the overwhelming force exerted by the upper block.  The collapse time was very close to freefall, at least according to lay standards, and there is nothing unusual or surprising about it.

Hmm. I still see no reason why this should be so symmetrical, why such a massive cloud of pulverised particles was created almost instantaneously, why all the massive central- core columns collapsed together, and how large sections of steel were projected hundreds of meters.

At the same time there were"fireballs" at ground level.

This mystery is not going to be resolved soon, so no reason at all for the Left Right and Middle of the American spectrum not to get on with exposing this crowd for all their other crimes .

Hmm. I still see no reason why this should be so symmetrical, why such a massive cloud of pulverised particles was created almost instantaneously, why all the massive central-core columns collapsed together, and how large sections of steel were projected hundreds of meters.

At the same time there were"fireballs" at ground level.

Everyone here seems determined to ignore the elephant in the living room, as if we’re all waiting for someone else to “notice” it.  One guy comments on the strange smell in the air while the other guy just can’t understand who dropped that huge load of crap on the carpet.  A third guy believes he’s figured it all out but hopes to communicate his conjectures didactively and inductively.  Or intuitively.  But everyone implicitly agrees that the first guy to recognize the obvious will be accused of stupidity, treachery, treason or paranoia.

Lurking with amusement mostly but I must give the dittohead IzzyStoned a wack.

You genius.  You have found the rabbit out.

You have proven that he didn’t invent the term beastmen, but lifted it from Mr LaRouche.  What does that prove Sherlock Holmes? 

I also call them The Junta, for which I claim copyright and also the Neo-Conmen.  Perhaps one of you can show us how clever you are and figure out where the rabbit borrowed that term.  I didn’t invent Shrub but got it from an Aussie Veterans site.

So if 9/11 was really a government inside job, then why did they go to the trouble of forging Saudi passports for the hijackers?  Why not simply plant Iraqi passports?  Wouldn’t that have made INFINITELY more sense?  Bush & Cheney wouldn’t have had to make up bogus WMD claims in order to justify their invasion of Iraq.  Are you suggesting that the US government can orchestrate something as elaborate as 9/11, but lacks the ability to forge a simple passport?

The problem as is often exposed is that the denialists and apologists, the faith brigade are lacking in anything but very simplistic paradigms to explain anything.  It isn’t as if the facts about the Muslim Brotherhood, British inelligence then OSS now CIA and Mossad infiltration of certain fundamentalist groups isn’t well known on the international scene.

Nobody is seriously denying there were some Saudis involved, they are the most likely candidates for the majority of Saudis hate your American blood.  They want to kill you and burn your houses down.  No doubt about it.  Unlike Afghanis, Iraqis or Iranians, at least back before 2002 who did not wish you any real harm.  That they didn’t like you is hardly an indigtment.  Most Australians, and people of every nationality now mostly share their dislike of you. We others have not even had you bringing democracy to us yet.

There were Saudis involved, they were probably involved in some sort of a half assed attempt to hijack some planes.  Some of them have shown to be CIA and others Mossad involved.  Some of the supposed Hijackers undoubtedly existed and certain corroborations of them at some points of the narrative exist.  Unfortunately what is known does not re-inforce the official fairy story, it further debunks it instead. 

The contradictions of the Hijackers including at least seven of them being alive and well are consistent with the involvment of outside forces, which were obviously overshadowing their every move and enabling their actions at every turn.  In the end though, they did not actually fly the planes.  I am sure enough of this after considering all the evidence and opinions of pilots and aeronautical engineers.  They were neither capable nor needed to perform the maneuvers needed for at least two of the flights..

Some of the Hijackers were getting drunk in a Strip joint the night before, which seems rather shortsighted given the likelihood they expected to be talking with Allah in a few short hours. The flight school training occurred, but the testimony of the instructors gives the complete conviction none of these hijackers were capable of piloting for a moment those airliners, let alone performing intricate maneuvers at the edge of the aircrafts physical limitations, which experienced military and civilian pilots has stated they may not have ben able to pull off even themselves.

I am not convinced that the flight 93 was crashed, but believe there is more than enough testimony from whistleblowers, and witnesses to make it likely that flight 93 was shot down by the Air National Guard.  The spreading of the debris field is proof the plane broke up in midair.  This FACT alone totally debunks the official account of flight 93. 

I have a point to consider for any who are actually thinking and not just actively shielding themselves from the truth.  Given the reasonable assumption that explosives were used in the demolitions of the buildings, we can easily answer the most obvious question which springs to mind.  At least it’s the first question which springs to the mind of aformer professional Pyrotechnician.  Who did it?  The answer is in the incredible finesse.  These were the most extraordinarily competent implosions.  Beyond good, these were three perfect implosions done with an arrogant signature of total mastery.  I think that a bit of research will soon show that only one or two companies in the world were capable of pulling off such a display.

The results will surprise, or not, depending on one’s level of cynicism.

“now, please explain how fire from jet fuel, which is pure kerosene and cannot reach the temperature needed to melt the steel (as already pointed out by rabbit), still managed to melt the steel.  and, since you seem to have forgotten that i mentioned this above, how come no one has come forward and made the simple proof of your theory and claimed the million dollars.”

Chad, nobody has claimed that the steel melted, or needed to melt.  Other than a few people in the initial days/weeks after the incident, and only for the reason that they didn’t have complete information.

However, consider for a moment that the reason folks might have thought that the steel must have melted is because of reports and observations of extremely hot fires.  (for example, police helicopters warned of red hot fires and warned of imminent collapse, I believe some eight minutes before collapse) No, not hot enough to “melt” steel, but hot enough to cause it to lose much of its strength, thereby causing the trusses to sag and contract, thereby breaking their connection with the columns, and hot enough to melt aluminum and thereby subsequently perhaps initiating an explosive thermite reaction.

What NIST and Bazant have presented, after months and months of exhaustive investigation, SHOULD qualify as proof and SHOULD entitle them collectively to the million dollars.  But I have a feeling that this is simply not good enough for whoever is offering the money.  The only, and I repeat the only way the AQDL will concede they are wrong is if we build exact duplicates of the towers, fly exact duplicates of the planes into them at the exact same points and angles, and see that the new buildings indeed do collapse just like the originals.

Even then, I doubt it will be sufficient.

Would that be sufficient for you, Chad?

I was wondering.....

At least 47 whole bodies were recovered from the WTC.  Would an autopsy on these bodies reveal whether they had inhaled Thermite/Thermate before they died?

If the families of those who perished are seeking truth, perhaps it can be found in the victims.  Were any autopsies done on any of the bodies.  I have a hard time believing that they would have occured.  The cause of death being obvious.  If even one body showed signs of elevated sulphur or whatever chemicals compose Thermite in the lungs perhaps we’d have our smoking gun.

Of course the true believers would claim the victims had been playing with sparklers.

Natty says,
Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, N.Y., told AFP that he saw pools of “literally molten steel” at the World Trade Center.

Tully was contracted after the Sept. 11 tragedy to remove the debris from the site.

Tully called Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Md., for consultation about removing the debris. CDI calls itself “the innovator and global leader in the controlled demolition and implosion of structures.”

Loizeaux, who cleaned up the bombed Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, arrived at the WTC site two days later and wrote the clean-up plan for the entire operation.

AFP asked Loizeaux about the report of molten steel on the site.

“Yes,” he said, “hot spots of molten steel in the basements.”

These incredibly hot areas were found “at the bottoms of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven [basement] levels,” Loizeaux said.

The molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed,” Loizeaux said. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon.

Construction steel has an extremely high melting point of about 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit.

Asked what could have caused such extreme heat, Tully said, “Think of the jet fuel.”

Loizeaux told AFP that the steel-melting fires were fueled by “paper, carpet and other combustibles packed down the elevator shafts by the tower floors as they ‘pancaked’ into the basement.” </blockquote>

Oddly enough Rabbit has a friend by the name of Peter Tully.

Anyway the presence of the components and byproducts of Thermate have been found.  . I’d say that is an unbroken chain of scientific evidence yet.

Of course Corn Chip you are right, the faith brigade will seize upon the idea the victims of 911 were playing with sparklers.  Forcing us to point out sparklers are Thermite, which doesn’t include sulphur.  Of course the sulphur could have been other fireworks.  Whassup faith brigade, do you think the 911 victims were playing with fireworks?  Maybe that would explain the flashes too?

Natalie babbles on:

What NIST and Bazant have presented, after months and months of exhaustive investigation, SHOULD qualify as proof and SHOULD entitle them collectively to the million dollars

Natalie........ I’m sure you would believe that which is an indigtment of your dishonesty as good as anything Rabbit could have wished for.

NIST and Bazant are both thoroughly discredited, the refutations are all presented above.  Months and months of wanking is not an orgy.  A lifetime of theorising does not a single bit of proof make.

Talk some more idiocy Natalie, dance some more of your smoke and mirrors dance.  Make a fool of yourself, and the whole government charade, be my guest as always.  WTH or Major Major do more, little as it is to support the official theory. 

See how your sucking up to the old Major got you a fine rebuke.  You impress nobody, except the Corpse, and let’s face it he doesn’t even impress you over much.

A theory isn’t proved by virtue of having been suggested.  It is amusing that a rabbit needs to remind you of this.  Your need for any sort of evidence is bigger than the available stock. You have no evidence at all.

Proof is as easy as building a scale model.  If the theory is possible it can be proven.  As for the explosives theory we already have a case which is built from an unbroken and interlocking chain of scientific evidence.  Not theory mind you, but past experience and measurable effects.

The ELEPHANT in the living room is not the small Hippos and mere mice described as such by some, it is this;

No amount of theoretical support for the Fairy Tale amounts to the most miniscule detraction from the reasonable hypothesis that the collapses were a result of explosives fueled demolitions.

For all the strawmen parades, the smoke and mirror carnivals and the the dissembling dances the only thing which supports the official fairy tale is FAITH.  Nothing but faith.

I am saying that this is not an opinion even, it deserves to be recognised for the FACT that it is.

Baltimore blasters
24 July 2004
From “New Scientist” Print Edition.  (interview with Mark Loizeaux)

excerpt:

NS: When you watched 9/11, did you imagine that the towers would come down like that?

LOIZEAUX:  I’ll defer to the reports coming out, but I will say - is society willing to pay for it? It’s far cheaper to take the battle to terrorists than let them bring it to us.

Molten metal in basement.  Fact, or * hearsay?

*To finish, none of these stories prove there was molten (as in liquid) steel at the WTC. There’s no evidence temperatures were hot enough to produce that (whatever the energy source), and some of the stories claiming “molten steel” have built-in implausibilities. Not least the idea that explosives are responsible. How much thermite would you need to burn for weeks, for instance? As the conspirators would presumably only want enough to burn for, let’s be generous, 30 minutes, wouldn’t extending this to a week mean using 168 times as much? If you want to believe that then fair enough, but it makes no sense to us.

Now by using your well known shill site, in trying to deride a very well proven fact, you have shown exactly how accurate that site is not. Thanks again Natty, your help in making my case is always appreciated.  I didn’t even have to waste all that time showing that the 911 Myths site is not worth the electrons wasted in its presentation.

Images of the World Trade Center Site Show Thermal Hot Spots on September 16 and 23, 2001. You dirty lying Bat!  You were just given the reference and now you would prove by your own hand that the Shill’s favorite bullshit site, is full of it.

Results of Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) remote sensing data and interpretations show the distribution and intensity of thermal hot spots in the area in and around the World Trade Center on September 16 and 23, 2001. Data collected on the 16th were processed, interpreted and released to emergency response teams on the 18th of September, 2001. The September 23 data were processed, interpreted and the results released on October 12, 2001. The images of the World Trade Center site show significant thermal hot spots on Sept. 16, 2001. By Sept. 23, 2001, most of the hot spots had cooled or the fires had been put out.

The AVIRIS instrument is a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) remote sensing instrument that measures upwelling spectral radiance in the visible through short-wavelength infrared. The instrument has 224 spectral channels (bands) with wavelengths from 0.37 to 2.5 microns (micrometers).

In response to requests from the EPA through the USGS, NASA flew AVIRIS on a De Havilland Twin Otter over lower Manhattan at mid-day on September 16 and 23, 2001. For these deployments, the Twin Otter was flown at altitudes of 6,500 and 12,500 feet. The spectral data for the maps shown here were measured at 6,500 feet and have a spatial resolution (pixel spacing) of approximately 6 feet (2 meters).

AVIRIS records the near-infrared signature of heat remotely. The accompanying maps are false color images that show the core affected area around the World Trade Center. Initial analysis of these data revealed a number of thermal hot spots on September 16 in the region where the buildings collapsed 5 days earlier. Analysis of the data indicates temperatures greater than 800oF. Over 3 dozen hot spots appear in the core zone. By September 23, only 4, or possibly 5, hot spots are apparent, with temperatures cooler than those on September 16

You are a shameless hussy!  A sleazy lying shill, to be sure aren’t you Natalie?  AND that is being polite about it.

I think NASA despite their obvious limitations can be relied upon in this instance.  Perhaps there were boxes of Sparklers stored in the basement?

Sooner or later you wil have to give up and accept that there is at least one fact on the ground which is not answerable by the official fairy tale. 

For your own soul you need to confess.  Poor poor sad and deluded Bat, the slippery slimy vampire doesn’t realise the Sun will always rise but it will.  The light dissipates darkness, and not the other way around.  It is natural, as all truth is natural.  Naturally Light displaces darkness.  It is why you dark ones, the undead, can never win. Why you can never win any converts, only slow down the rate you lose them.

By the way Natalie, LOIZEAUX is useful for making the point of witnesses to the molten Steel.  What is not of any use is his opinions.  He actually suggested carpet, paper and curtains, organic sources for the heat which melted the steel.  This is of course absolutely ridiculous, impossible by at least 1000 degrees celcius.  His opinions are but those of someone grasping for answers to an enigma, and thus his assumption of who was responsible for the attacks is worse than useless.

Especially since we’ve established OBL was not evidenced to be involved.

I do thank you for debasing yourself by posting those thoroughly spurious words though.  I predicted such grubby conduct from your camp before you ever showed your pointy little face.  It is gratifying to be proven completely right about the moral and intellectual poverty of the supporters of the official shill swill.

Natalie, queen of the Faith Brigade.

By the way, I have not heard anyone ever wonder why steel stayed molten and or hot for so long as it appears to have done. I cannot be sure that this is because everyone naturally knows something any farmer or fireman should be able to tell you.

Having seen a few bushfires and having made a fair bit of quality charcoal it is obvious to the rabbit that by removing oxygen and insulating the molten mass as has happened, the retention of it’s thermal entropy has been GREATLY enhanced.  Imagine the excellent thermal insulation properties of all that pulverised concrete.

Once when living in the bush, I knew of a buried root from an ancient Jarrah tree which smouldered quietly away underground for six years, starting ocassional fires on the ground when it reached some point or another in its slow advance. 

The molten steel is entirely consistent with, in fact it is only really feasible if , THERMATE has been used.

G’day rabbit,

No time to read right back, but I seem to remember there are about 20? demolition companies in the US. Coincidence that this particular LOIZEAUX oiseau who cleared up after Okla City turns up again ? Maybe.

The “Inevitable Symmetrical Pancake Hypothesis “ is just that. A Hypothesis.

Demolition men could save a lot of time and explosives IF they just weakened one side of a structure, and then it came straight down.

Sounds unlikely to this old tree-cutter.

Following the NATTY- link onwards from 911myths as you did, we get to
Ken Holden, Commissioner of the NYC DDC (Dept Of Design and Construction), evidence to Kean Commission, April 1 2003

Quick, but safe decisions regarding where to put the cranes had to be made, inspection of the slurry wall and water in the basement were conducted, while numerous fires were still burning and smoldering. Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from Building 6. Cars - both burned and pristine - were suspended in the air balanced on cracked parking garage slabs.

quote from frog ---

Many people have forgotten the intensity of the Anthrax Scare in the USA, while the “Patriot Act” was going through.

Think back, Americans, that scare just disappeared did it not ?

It served its purpose, as did the Ricin Terrorist Cell in London.

The ricin was not real, even, but the anthrax was

Anthrax of that strain was traced to..... Fort Detrick,.?.. and then the FBI investigation dried up.

Research on biological warfare is concentrated in government laboratories, and private ones closely associated with them.

Research on exciting new explosives will be found where ?

Jones et al hypothesise the use of thermate --- they know it exists. The next hypothesis is obvious ..........

(Clue ---- apply Rumsfeldian logic . )

Frog

How does one get up again after such a series of grotesque defeats as those now suffered by our dear Shill Bat, the mad and wacky Natalie? 

How can one raise one’s head again in public?  Facing such abject humiliation on an ongoing basis is worse than Massochism, it can only come down to one thing.  The oldest profession is actually selling one’s self, in whatever form.

Of course the Anthrax scare was a warning to those few senators still thinking of showing a spine on the patriot act which was at that time only a quaint name.  Such relatively subtle points will be lost on a craven denialist like Natalie and will serve instead as a means of smoking some mirrors, assuming she is short of suitable subjects in this regard.  The 2 Trillion Dollar Robbery announced in a whisper by Cheney and subsequently effectively covered up by 911 is certainly a MAJOR smoking gun if one seeks an admin based Motive, and assuming the yet to be announced WOT was not enough in itself. 

In fact the question of who did this and why is NO LONGER A SECRET!

A short while since a story came to the attention of the rabbit.  This rabbit then spent a week reading this story and verifying details of it.  It seems to me to be the real deal.

If you are ready for the answers, and assuming you are at least informed enough that you understand already the following FACTS.  Who owned the buildings and the insurance history.  The actual residencies of especially WTC-7.  The fact of the Put Options on American Airlines and United Airlines then Chad and others who are seeking understanding the following is I think the latest word.

9/11 Whistleblower Richard Andrew Grove Come Forward

“This man, Richard Andrew Grove, a whistleblower who worked for the big boys and money people behind 9/11 has come out with information to set the 9/11 movement on fire. Although many have rejected his work ... including the IRS, Treasury Dept and SEC, what he exposes on Marsh & McLellan, AIG, Dyncorp, Spitzer, Stewart Air Force Base, Fitzgerald, Bremer, missing gold and bucks of 9/11, software that predicts the future and more will ASTOUND YOU as it did me. 

Endorsed by Rabbit too.. 

If this guy is a part of a conspiracy my dear, queer and odd little denialist cringers, then at least his is better backed than yours shen it comes to puttinmg together a credible story.

9/11 Whistleblower Richard Andrew Grove Come Forward

Be brave my babies and read it.  Long and weird, like life, yet thoroughly likely.  This is the answer for those who have gone a step beyond and ask now for some who’s and why’s.

rabbit
I checked, there are a number of qualified companies US, -wide.....“implosion world”.

Following leads, as I usually do, came to this , which looks like an effort to build up LOIZEAUX and CDI as the unquestioned world experts.

Coincidence piles upon coincidence.

The Grove story. I will re-read it, but there is sure something there.
I watched the S&L;and other scandals, BCCI etc, growing from close-to, so the idea of very large-scale robbery, money-laundering, is not new to me.

i recommend ALL to follow the links on the same page to “indira singh”. 
Just see how the news blackout has been imposed on the post-911 victims.
As with Gulf War Syndrome, these people have probably been accused of mass hysteria, but is there anyone out there denying the reality of the former ?

canuck my posting from “germany” is odd, I agree ................... because I ain’t.

Rabbit,

How does the NASA page about thermal imaging support your contention about molten steel?  For steel to be truly molten, the temperature would have had to be some 2800 degrees F.  The greatest temperature estimation gleened by thermal imaging is 1375F.

Why is it such an absolute that thermate had to be what initiated the conditions that resulted in whatever was the true state of the materials under the pile, whether truly molten (liquid), or more likely in my estimation, various shades of orange/red, but still being solid.

The only clear description of liquid metal...."rivers flowing”..... appears to be more of a literary device base on hearsay, than an accurate description of the true state of the metal.  Other instances of some type of metal or perhaps even other material in various states of “glow” certainly could be arrived at by other means.

Why is it that you’re willing to consider the vast array of disparate divinings by Richard Andrew Grove, a software salesman, creative writer and soul searcher as all worthy of consideration, yet you seem unwilling to consider ANYTHING other than thermate as the heat source that resulted in whatever state of whatever metal or whatever material?

I think (I hope) we can all agree that it was basically a top-down collapse.  Even if there was (a mighty big if) thermate used deliberately as a steel cutting device, how would we end up with any substantial amount of it in the depths of the pile?  Surely it would have been expended in order to “do its job”, or, if there were any remaining, wouldn’t it have ended up fairly high on the pile?

Which of course raises the question:  If thermate was used, just how does one explain the fact that either it was not rendered useless by the crash of the planes, or that these planes were driven with such precision as to land EXACTLY just above the thermate charges?

natalie, jeff gannon called and he wants you back at the white house pronto.

Don’t tell me, Diggins.  You’re fourteen too.

Am I close?

bottoms up, Natalie

Yep, I think I’m close.

Natalie your last post was babbling and isn’t worthy of an answer. Still the rabbit shall give a contemptuous wave of his paw and flatten the ground where you attempt to build support for an unlikely theory out of the sand.

The fact of molten steel is not in doubt.  It is herewith and elsewhere confirmed.  Your nitpicking of these and many other points are moot since the details which you randomly attempt, to cast aspersions are more often than not actually confirmed in even the official accounts.  There isn’t actually any question of the molten pools, it is witnessed and the impossibly high temperatures even a week later is even covered by the NASA imaging. 

The imaging is several days after the collapses and even on the day of 911such temperatures would have been impossible by the official theory.  Gabbling on about a few hundred degrees of which the actual temperature loss would be on an inverted curve is dumb. This means the temperature drop would be most at the start.  This can be seen in any cup of coffee and I observe it several times a day cooking and cooling the mould for Kayaks in my little Rotomoulding factory.

So why drizzle on about the fact that a week after 911 the temperature was less than molten?  1375F is still too hot by several orders of magnitude.  Idiot!

Get yourself something better than this lost cause lover for you are being bounced like a rubber ball.

Still ducking the real issue which is that everything is at least consistent with the scenario of Controlled Explosive Demolitions.

Frog

You have found them of course.  Let me confirm the impression of them being the best.  That sure is the word.

There is someone, a company in particular who would be the natural and possibly only choice for such agrand job.  Three simultaneous, maximum elevation, skyscraper demos, (in the middle of a crowded city), who else?  The same company best placed to clean up the mess afterwards. 

A task which is normally considered a part of the demolitions contract by the way. 

................................^^...................................

The only thing unusual about the contract with Controlled Demolition for the cleanup of the WTCs is that we haven’t been privy to the full contract I suspect.

................................^^...................................

Read the Groves Story all answers will become apparent.

Diggins

Natalie works for a shilling outfit like the Rendon group for example, which supplies the Pentagon etal.

Oh dear, this is too funny not to post off topic. 
The Comic Book War

She HAS NOT read Groves’ account or followed his references for sources.  Rabbit righteously assumes this for she has not even read the sources she herself posted above as was shown.

Instead Natalie asks another of those profound questions which take up the thinking time of such faith based 911 believers.

Why is it that you’re willing to consider the vast array of disparate divinings by Richard Andrew Grove, a software salesman, creative writer and soul searcher as all worthy of consideration, yet you seem unwilling to consider ANYTHING other than thermate as the heat source that resulted in whatever state of whatever metal or whatever material?

Since we have no evidence of anything other than Thermate and a vast array of evidence including chemical analysis for Thermate.................................^^..................................... ...the rabbit cannot explain to you Natalie why we might be inclined to believe in Thermate.

As for the rest of the question the rabbit shall have to leave you to ponder that strange phenomenen in the dark and twisted corridors of your own mind.

Perhaps we are simply without enough Faith Natalie? 

I think that’s it, we are faithless.  We lack faith, something you appear to possess in walmart size quantities.

Lagomorph should adopt the duck as his totem animal, since he is such a quack.

Pyrotechnic - adj. Of or relating to fireworks.  American Heritage Dictionary.

Rabbit happens to be a competent and experienced metal worker and welder.  More importantly I am an explosives �expert� more or less.  As an experienced pyrotechnic chemist and shotfirer and professional pyrotechnician, I think I�m sufficiently well placed to confirm the photos resemble Thermite cutting, and the presence of the chemical residues in the testing which you are conveniently ignoring, is virtually proof positive.

Posted by Rabbit on Jun 29, 2006 at 9:40 PM
Was the Presidential Election Stolen?

Uh uh.  The 911 explosive demolitions of the three WTCs were the very best demolition jobs I�ve ever seen, and while I curse the people who did it to hell, as a professional I have to admit that they were exquisite pieces of work and I doubt many people in the world could have managed it.  We do of course have a good idea of who actually did it, and yes, they are very closely involved with the clean-up too.

Posted by Rabbit on Jul 11, 2006 at 9:03 AM
The 9/11 Faith Movement

I have a point to consider for any who are actually thinking and not just actively shielding themselves from the truth.  Given the reasonable assumption that explosives were used in the demolitions of the buildings, we can easily answer the most obvious question which springs to mind.  At least it�s the first question which springs to the mind of aformer (sic) professional Pyrotechnician.  Who did it?  The answer is in the incredible finesse.  These were the most extraordinarily competent implosions.  Beyond good, these were three perfect implosions done with an arrogant signature of total mastery.  I think that a bit of research will soon show that only one or two companies in the world were capable of pulling off such a display.

Posted by Rabbit on Jul 11, 2006 at 9:03 AM
The 9/11 Faith Movement

So here we have Lagomorph Anatidae, hopping quacker, expert welder, and firecracker artist, claiming expertise in civil engineering, explosive ordnance, and thermite demolitions.  Just how well does Lagomorph Anatidae�s claims hold up?

The evidence is here:

http://rense.com/general70/pphe.htm

The wonderful thing about Rense is that it is 100% consistent; if Rense says something, you can bet your rectum that it is wrong.  And Lagomorph Anatidae takes Rense at face value in all things.  Rense says that the photo cited above is direct evidence that thermite (or thermate) was used to cut the columns in the WTC buildings.  And Lagomorph Anatidae, with his expertise in welding and firecrackers, agrees.  But the marks on the surface of the cut column look suspiciously like the marks of a cutting torch and, Voila!  Here are pictures of welders cutting WTC columns during the cleanup, well after the buildings were demolished. 

http://www.geocities.com/debunking911/thermite.htm

So, will Hopping Quacker admit he made a mistake?  Hail, no.  Lagomorph Anatidae has too much psychological investment in his silly position to ever look at the facts and admit he doesn�t know what he is talking about. 

Never, not one single time, has Lagomorph Anatidae ever come up with an original idea on 09/11, or on any other subject.  He borrows from Rense and other nutcases, and insists that they are gospel, when Hopping Quacker has no basis for knowing whether their data is good or not.  I love it.  Enjoy

Thankyou for your prime endorsement, Professor Scorp.  A Hopping Quacker.  Yes Mr Scorp that is indubetably an interesting creature.  With all the things Scorpy has been indulging in via his rectum lately (re smoke and tubes and things) I would want to see collateral before entering into any bets with it.

Now Natalie be a good shill Bat dear and please say right on cue

“Excellent points Scorp”

To which the rabbit replies; Yes, it is good though pointless really, of you to list the occasions in which I have been consistent in this regard.  Your point about it all?  Maybe you didn’t have one.  Thanks dear Scorp but the funny old Lagomorph has it covered.  You get back to your general buffoonery now and leave me to repeat any of my words which I feel need it.

Upon second reading I see you did think you were labouring to establish something.  Scorp my little muffin, if you look up the thread to an earlier posting I gave you the point that the column could have been cut with Oxy, the photo was not conclusive in and of itself.  I am happy to drop the whole photo for it is not of any value on its own and is less and less conclusive the more you make such a desperate effort to establish I was mistaken in my analysis. 

If the thing means so much to you dear soul, I’ll agree the column might have been cut with OXY, even probably was.

Hooray for Scorpy!  Hip Hip hooray.  You are right.  The cut column photo doesn’t prove anything.

I’m happy to yield the point for free Scorp and was the last time I addressed you, you have but a single note but you keep on playing it as if your life depended on it. This of itself doesn’t support the official story.  Sorry old Scorp that isn’t how it works.  More importantly, it does not disprove the Explosive Demolition contention or cast any aspersions on the idea.

Has the term running on the spot got any meaning for you Corpse?

Rabbit makes a gift of his long cherished Private Troll, Scorpy.  He is herewith bequeathed to the wider ITT community to enable the Scorpling to concentrate more fully on his duties as court jester.

You know his needs are simple.  A good skull wacking from time to time, a regular meal of his own feet, which he usually is so kind as to catch and skin for the kitchen so to speak, and a place to call his own.

The debunking site is another typical load of half truths, strawmen and red herrings.  I only begin to list the faults with its reasoning but anybody who has followed the earlier references will not be moved by it., They actually don’t manage to make the case against thermite at all.  Among the many small innacuracies is the suggestion of the cuts on the columns being done on an angle to control the direction of the falling column during cleanup.  This is not a forrest where they are felling trees, such a job involves a crane on a site like this so this is a red herring.

The other common red herring this camp tosses about is that Thermite can’t cut sideways.  They are basing this analysis it seems upon the science experiment type videos circulating on the net showing thermite being burned loosely over steel, which is not how it is used in demolitions.  Of course it cuts sideways, are you trying to suggest that explosives are not used to cut steel columns in such circumstances now SCorpse?

That is a novel approach.  Get right to the source and claim that explosive demolitions of Skyscrapers is an unproven theory, an impossibility. That really is turning the tables on their ends isn’t it Scorpling?

So what did you think about Major’s “natural” thermite reaction theory, Rabbit?  (I know it’s not his theory, but the one he brought to our attention.)

I don’t think you ever really commented on that, or did I miss it?

If you know it’s not my theory, then why call it my theory?  It’s F.R.Greening’s theory, which you knew when you provided the following link:

http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

Greening, a retired nuclear engineer from Ontario, Canada, subsequently challenged Jones to conduct a more realistic experiment to verify his claims, which Jones did.  The results are described in a paper which can be obtained at this link.

Another unrelated study appears to conclude that the kinetic energy required to create the pyroclastic clouds of debris could not be obtained from the gravitational potential energy which brought down the buildings:

http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/dustvolume/volumev3.html

It’s necessary to note that the commission’s analysis did not extend beyond the initial structural collapse.

i really am baffled by people like corpse and the stoner.  are you guys really trying to suggest that we should disregard everything that the rabbit has said simply because he misused one word, or used the same word as someone else?  that’s pretty lame.  perhaps you could try something more creative.

why doesn’t someone other than miss Natalie and the Major try to argue some facts with him?  i realize that there are at least two ‘analyses’ of almost every ‘fact’, one that supports the faith based theory and one that doesn’t, which makes it very hard to get to the bottom of this.  i think, though, that further investigation is needed, if we really want the truth.

so, corpse, if you want to play your silly word games please do so at home with your dictionary.  if you would like to try actually aguing, or even making a good point, you may want to make sure you understand what you want to say before you attempt to say it.

we don’t want the truth chad. we want endless rhetoric because we have no where to turn in the real world and at least a few major gnat stoner corpses reply here, and the state terrorists go on about the business of killing, but heck, that’s out there in the crazy world and in here everything is always the same, 180 comments later, and it’s comforting because none of us are dead. (except corpse.)

CHAD

Methinks you have perhaps misread the Rabbit’s eloquent Disquisitions ,
Wherein he points out with Precision

That the NattyScorp Batcave Bushcheney
Conspiracy Theory

is but

Pure Factoidal Repetition. ?

THE FAITHFUL FOOLS BELIEVE THE CONSPIRACY ORDAINED BY THEIR DECIDER

The rest of us rack our brains, for we do not have the Certainty, the TRUE FAITH of those who believe in their Dear Leader.

nats, groping that german lady is not going to score you points with jeffy.

In the same PBS documentary where Silverstein makes his famous “pull” remark, a cleanup worker says, “...we’re getting ready to pull building six.” listen below:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/cutter.html

Why would David Ray Griffin talk to engineers about planes causing the towers to collapse? No one said planes caused the towers to collapse! As a matter of fact, the towers were made to cope with multiple plane strikes. FEMA and NIST say “fires” were the reason the towers collapsed. However, NIST says that most of the affected steel samples from the perimeter steel of the towers show heat damage of around 250 C (482 F). This is too low a temperature to cause structural steel to weaken and bring about global collapse (650 C is the point at which structural steel loses half of its structural integrity for God’s sake!).

By the way, the hottest aviation fuel will burn at is 1000 C under laboratory conditions. Cut that figure by two thirds in the diffuse, non-laboratory, fires at the towers, and you come up with a figure around 333 C (This temperature would tend to confirm the low NIST 250 C number). The WTC steel was certified by UL of up to 2,000 F (1093 C) for three hours (however, structural steel won’t actually start to melt until reahing 3,000 F). Both towers collapsed within approximately 1.5 hours (56 minutes for the south tower) at temperatures around 250 C (482 F)! Something is very wrong here.

The 42,000 gallons of diesel fuel stored in WTC 7 did not go up in flames. The fires at WTC 7 were regional, and confined to floors 7, 11 and 12 as shown below:

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7/fire.html

How does fuel oil that burns at 333 C, tops, destroy structural steel that loses half its strength at 650 C? How do regional fires bring about a symmetrical collapse of a steel framed building (and collapse 47 floors in 6.6 seconds, to boot! That’s free fall speed. Free fall speed too for the Towers at 10 seconds!).

I believe if anyone has been taking matters concerning 9/11 on faith, it is you, Sir. The 9/11 Truth Movement is only interested in the facts and the laws of physics.

Regards,

Dean M. Jackson
Washington, D.C.

Major,

I think (hope) you understand that my calling it your theory was only used in such a way as to illustrate that you embraced it, or at least you sure seemed to: 

“Finally, Jones’ demonstration of pouring molten aluminum over a rusted steel beam is misleading.  Aluminum reacts explosively with crushed ferrous oxide and concrete because the surface area of the crushed materials is dramatically increased and provides a much greater chance of explosive reaction.  In fact, it’s very likely that the chain of collapse was initiated by explosive contact of the molten aluminum airframe with the crushed concrete, gypsum and rusted steel created by the collision of the jetliner with the WTC and the subsequent firestorm which melted the airframe and exposed the contents of the impacted area.”

In fact, you didn’t cite any other source for the theory, leading one to believe that perhaps it was indeed yours.  You even sounded somewhat authorative.  I then acknlowedged “your” theory, somewhat agreed with its plausibility, and linked to where I had “heard” or “read” if you prefer, the theory presented previously.

I then went on to describe, albeit jokingly, how Jones had rebutted Greening’s theory.

Not that there’s anything particularly wrong with all this, I just don’t understand all the nit-picking.  Read vs. heard?  No, not MY theory, why did you say it was MY theory?

Now, you prodeed to link to a dubious theory analyzing the dust clouds.  Could this be a reliable indicator of the exact forces that brought down the buildings?  Jim Hoffman seems like a pretty smart guy, but I don’t think he has the necessary expertise to properly analyze dust/debris clouds.  He obviously didn’t make any same day observations or measurments within the clouds, which would have been crucial, don’t you think?

Lest we forget, those buildings contained massive quantities of gypsum, ceiling tile, carpet, and lightweight, not the conventional concrete floors we’re all familiar with in our garages.  It’s only natural that there would be HUGE quantities of dust and small debris, and to try to measure it from pictures, not knowing its true density or make-up, reminds me of one of the experiments I saw at my son’s second grade science fair.

Even if there were thermate or any kind of charges used to weaken the structure at exactly the right moment, wouldn’t their amount have had to be MASSIVE, in order to achieve some discernable difference in the dust cloud?  We know from simple observation that there was nothing like that.  A few poofs of dust out a few windows, is all we have.  The only remaining avenue is to make the ridiculous claim that somehow charges were precisely set off sequentially as the building collapsed from the top down.  Not only is there no visual evidence of this, but it’s been proven to not have been necessary, by people (Bazant and others) that are qualified to do so.

Let me ask you.  What do you think of Rabbit’s theory about molten pools of metal in the basement only being possible because of thermate/mite?  (I know, it’s not really his theory, but you know what I mean.)

I’m not saying you necessarily believe or disbelieve any ot this, and I’m not trying to put thoughts in your head about anything, but I’m confused as to your position.  At times it seems clear, but other times it seems, I don’t know, masked somehow.  Is it simply because you can’t stand the thought of joining with a “right winger”, even though you know “your side” is really blowing it here? 

I hope that’s not the case, because the best way to help your side, at least electorally, is to join with anyone you can in order to combat this growing cancer within let’s face it, largely left-leaning circles.  I really don’t think you’d approve of a thermite platform being inserted at your party’s next convention.  I know Terry Allen wouldn’t.

Dean, or Brian,

There was a slow sinking of the penthouses in WTC7, which were behind the visible north wall.  This collapse alone took 8.2 seconds.  Seismograph traces of the entire collapse show that it encompassed 18 seconds.  Only the penthouses and the north wall were visible in videos, 8 sec. for the penthouses and 7 sec. for the north wall.

This 6.6 second number is extremely misleading and erroneous.

The whole thing is WAY more complicated (4.5mb pdf) than is constantly described by the truthies.

Are we to believe that all the engineers and materials experts employed by NIST really said that no steel ever got above 482F?  Even if they did, consider this.  The inside of your oven might reach this temperature.  But, it’s insulated.  If you were to turn your oven on high for an hour or so, with no insulation, and it had a massive load across the top, I think there’d be trouble.  One of the key elements of the collapse was the removal of the fireproofing, if there still was any, from the lightweight steel trusses, thereby enabling the (if you insist) low temperature fires to transfer enough heat to them to cause them to sag.  Ask yourself...why is it that I so rarely hear a “truthie” talk about insulation or fireproofing?

“9/11 truth” ......  778,000 results
“9/11 truth” insulation .......  561
“9/11 truth” fireproofing ......  604
“9/11 truth” fireproofing trusses ......  320
“9/11 truth” fireproofing trusses sag ......  104

I’ll have to check the NIST report again, but I really doubt that you’re representing the temperatures and their effects fairly, and I KNOW that things aren’t anywhere near as simplistic as you make them out to be.

I believe if anyone has been taking matters concerning 9/11 on faith, it is you, Sir. The 9/11 Truth Movement is only interested in the facts and the laws of physics.

Pardon me while I laugh hysterically on the floor.  Do you really want me to wear out my hard drive collecting all the political rantings made by members of the 9/11 “truth” movement? 

Let me guess....you’re against the Iraq war too.  I’ve got pretty good faith that this is the case!

Thermite is a chemical mixture of aluminum and ferric oxide powders which is ignited by a fuse burning at an extremely high temperature.  Greening’s rebuttal to Jones’ demonstration (pouring molten aluminum over rusted steel) implied that the demonstration did not sufficiently replicate the conditions encountered at the WTC impact zone, asserting that molten aluminum is more likely to produce an explosive reaction with a pre-heated mixture of crushed concrete, gypsum and rusted steel, because crushing those materials increased their surface area and therefore the likelihood of an explosive reaction.  (Thermite, after all, is a mixture of fine powders, reduced to dimensions of micron-sized magnitudes which, in the aggregate, present a radically larger surface area and will, with the proper ignition temperature, radically increase the probability of an explosive reaction.) Jones then reproduced those conditions (crushed, preheated materials, not the thermite) in subsequent experiments and described the results (negligible, non-explosive reactions) in the paper to which I had linked ("link").  The difference, as far as I can tell, between Jones’ experiments and Greening’s expectations was that no ignition temperature was achieved and, therefore no explosive reaction.  Whether the absence of an ignition temperature was misleading on Jones’ part or unlikely despite Greening’s expectations is debatable.  It certainly is an appropriate basis, among others, for further analysis.

Hoffman did, in fact, estimate the volume of the pyroclastic cloud from photographs taken within fifteen or thirty seconds of the complete collapse.  Read the report.  According to his analysis conservation of energy requires that the kinetic energy derived from the cloud formation (heat sinks) should be comparable to the potential energy which drove the gravitational collapse (heat source).  Ideally they should be equal.  His estimates appear to conclude that the kinetic energy was much greater than the available potential energy.

Hoffman’s report, incidentally, was obtained from your source (911 Myths).

OK Major,

That’s fine. You are certainly under no obligation to answer any of my questions.  I’ll just keep......wondering.

Yes, I’m very aware of the debate between Jones and Greening, and all about the particulates, etc. etc. 

I know that Hoffman’s basis of conclusion is his volume measurements.  Like I said....measurements from photographs.

My point was that he obviously wasn’t flying through the debris clouds with dust-o-meters that day, and has no accurate way of knowing the properties of that cloud, at least certainly not (in my opinion) accurately enough to proclaim that explosives must have been used to account for the observed cloud.  I’m no expert on anything scientific, really, but this just seems goofy to me.

Let’s link to the 9/11Myths page where you say you came across Hoffman’s report.  That way, we are not left with a one-sided point of view.  Here we can digest some lay but pretty common sense observations by Mike, and also read this alternative analysis of the debris cloud question, and others, again by Greening.

MAJOR

You have opposite you a 100% guaranteed SHILL.

She can be sweet, even human, but her job by foul or fair means is to discredit any oppposition to Bushworld.

Seemingly innocent and rather mealy-mouthed, she insinuates her way into “discussions”.

I can’t right now remember the first time --- but it was something like ---

“Well this is the first time I’ve ever posted, but it seems to me that................etc.... and then..........  the SPIEL .”

Visible at 1000m, with experience.

She has been caught out on numerous occasions, on facts .

NOW, we see her again parading the same stuff as before, pretending the same ignorance of evidence shown to her previously.

Looks like a delaying-action to me..

She has been caught out on numerous occasions, on facts .

The problem with trying to rebut that statement, Frog, is that your definition of fact is not simply that, but more closely related to your opinion, or your conspiratorial imagination.

No, my job is not to defend “Bushworld”.  But I do consider it a worthy cause, to counter this incidious form of destructive, hate-based propaganda, which serves nobody really, except perhaps terrorists and Alex Jones’ bank account.

This nonsense can only HELP insure that more Republicans are elected, and if I only cared about that I would be joining right in, pretending that it all makes perfect sense. 

Two words.  Operation Northwoods.  There ya go!

Natters
Slightyly more subtle stuff than before; I see.

ANYONE OUT THERE who believes that old frog is involved in insidious , destructive,hate-based propaganda ,

which serves Terrists, and Alex Jones’ bank account, not to forget my Democrat - sabotaging of their electoral chances.MAY be lead to believe that this was apure figment of his imagination?

The natural thermite theory is ludicrous on its face. It isn’t Major’s theory, you are a dishonest lassy at the best of times are you not?

Indeed theoretically if one could atomise, via explosives for example the correct ratios of Iron Oxide and Aluminium it would create a potential thermite reaction.  It is not a viable theory in practice.

To create thermite requires very finely ground components and considerable mixing for homogeneity.  It isn’t like you just chuck in a piece of rusty iron and a bit of aluminium and voila it goes whoosh.

Thermite is notoriously difficult to ignite as well.  There is no point in running after such ridiculous red herrings as an accidental thermite reaction. By the way, I don’t know if others realise that Thermite doesn’t only come in an Iron Aluminium form.  It is made from using the oxide of any metal mixed in close proximity to the pure form of a more reactive metal.  Therefore one could for example use Copper oxide and Zinc etc.

Reading further I see major has covered some of this.  Good.  By the way Major one thing you said earlier needs to be mentioned.  You pointed out that the billiard ball demonstartion was inadequate for it involved the acceleration rate being completely zero at each subsequent fall.  I agree this isn’t realistic as the actual fall would have involved less and less effect on the acceleration rate as each floor gave way.  The experiment does illustrate the basic concept of changing acceleration rates though which is all I think was the intention.

thank you for your insipid stupidity, terry allen.

you are total crap

only defended by automatrons like natalie

but natalie is really a good _______

she probably suported nuking hiroshima, believing tonkin, grenada, haiti, hitting chile on 911, iran/contra…

this is the bed you will sleep in

enjoy your glorious fire

ps kudos on murdering all those lebs this week

you dipshit from hades

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inIWj6CU0GI&NR;

Natalie I think we can look up this page and quickly find at least six facts you have been caught out, misrepresenting.  How can you seriously claim otherwise.

You claimed that there was no real source for the fall times of about 10 seconds.  Yet your own source mentioned it!

You claimed nobody was saying their were molten pools of steel.  A blatant falsehood as was immediately shown.

You claimed that a hodgepodge of waffling theorising by Bazant, was proof that gravity and fire brought down the WTCs.  This is a deliberate attempt to mislabel a theory as a fact.

You have claimed that a long since discredited video of Osama Bin Laden is proof of his involvment when even the FBI don’t agree with you.

Natty it isn’t even hard to find matters about which you have not only misrepresented the truth but invariably refused to acknowledge the fact when it is shown to be so.

You are so utterly bereft of any credibility that it is as always becoming nauseating watching you twisting and dissembling, and shilling. 

Major has already made several comments which moderate at least the views of a few facts, and he has done so without lying or twisting and without ad-hominem or rhetoric. Major has gained certain concessions as a result.  Just shows what you might have achieved had you ever possessed an ounce of reason, Batgirl..  Certain weaknesses in some bits of evidence still doesn’t DISPROVE or even significantly weaken our argument.  These things don’t of themselves alter the balance of evidence which still points as irrevocably towards Explosive demolition as always, and they do not in any way support the official contention that fire and gravity did it.  The fires especially in WTC-7 were not hotter than and of no longer duration than barbecues anyway.

We have an unbroken chain of interlocking scientific evidence and known facts, which support our contention and tend to disprove yours at the same time.

Nat the Vampire Shill-Bat, Rabbit couldn’t make up a better comic book shill if he tried.

The natural thermite theory is ludicrous on its face. It isn’t Major’s theory, you are a dishonest lassy at the best of times are you not?

You don’t read very thoroughly, do you Rabbit?

“So what did you think about Major’s “natural” thermite reaction theory, Rabbit?  (I know it’s not his theory, but the one he brought to our attention.)”

Thermite is notoriously difficult to ignite as well.  There is no point in running after such ridiculous red herrings as an accidental thermite reaction.

I actually tend to agree, Rabbit.  But somehow it makes a heck of a lot more sense to me than imagining that some shadowy entity suceeded in placing dozens or hundreds of thermate “cutter charges” all over the WTC’s, and convincing those bumbling terrorists to fly into the precise locations necessary so as not to disturb the intricate set-up.

However, this is what a materials engineer had to say:

Thomas W. Eagar is one scientist who has paid some attention to the demolition hypothesis — albeit grudgingly. A materials engineer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mr. Eagar wrote one of the early papers on the buildings’ collapses, which later became the basis for a documentary on PBS. That marked him for scrutiny and attack from conspiracy theorists. For a time, he says, he was receiving one or two angry e-mail messages each week, many accusing him of being a government shill. When Mr. Jones’s paper came out, the nasty messages increased to one or two per day.

Others have brought up this notion as well, so Mr. Jones has carried out experiments in his lab trying to get small quantities of molten aluminum to react with rust. He has not witnessed the reaction and so rules it out. But Mr. Eagar says this is just a red herring: Accidental thermite reactions are a well-known phenomenon, he says. It just takes a lot of exposed surface area for the reaction to start. --- “Professors of Paranoia”, Chronical of Higher Education, June 23, 2006

No, my job is not to defend “Bushworld”.  But I do consider it a worthy cause, to counter this incidious form of destructive, hate-based propaganda, which serves nobody really ...

So this is your job then, defending the faith, but it is a worthy one?

Diggins, don’t let the Bat get to you.  It’s true that she is a shockingly gross defender of pretty much anything which could be construed as evil.  Natalie does indeed support all those atrocities you mention, if she is instructed to do so by her programmers. 
She loves Depleted Uranium more than most issues, because surprise, surprise it is the NUMBER ONE priority for censorship by the pentagon. We know who gets all the money and thus who has the money to pay for Shills, so it is logical that she puts it first.  Of course then 911, is her secondary area of responsibility.  Rabbit has had the unbridled pleasure of watching Nat’s views change from one day to the next because the official version has as well.  Predictable as a cheap watch is Natalie.

Try to see her for the helpful creature she is, she is a great enabler for truth, forcing others to bring forth and to hone the precision and accuracy of their message.  It takes some practice not to be caught up in her dissembling dance and have the issues be blown to the wind.  She is untiring, but she can be so totally humiliated and overwhelmed with something she will dissapear for a week or two.  She will sit on the sidelines when the thread is full and she is getting walloped, yet someone new need only post after a silent thread of a week or more and she will be instantly online starting from square one.  As if most of her points haven’t already been thoroughly destroyed or completely disproven.

How can you allow yourself to be angry with such a moral whore?  She is just fine like she is, enjoy the antics as she slips and slides around in her own slime. She is without any real emotion when it comes to normal human reactions to things like death and suffering, but she has studied human emotions and thinks she knows what emotive arguments need to be made to maybe capture someone’s attention.

The biggest problem she has is that she is always given such shit material to work with.  She hasn’t got any real facts which can be made to logically draw a strong case for her story.  She hasn’t got any growing organisations of experts or concerned citizens to support her causes.  The contentions she must make are ludicrous, absurd on their face, and yet she is expected to try and support such lunacy without any moderation and she must also never once admit error even in the face of quite remarkable defeats of some some of her message.

You really should feel sorry for her, we all should...........................can rabbit feel sorry for her?..................................................trying..............trying g.................nope.  Can’t do it. 
She should get an honest job that’s all.

Rabbit only uses quotations which have significance and relevance.  Unlike some who do so for no other reason than to fill up space. Nat quotes nothing of prominence, but often she tries to slip gratuitous litle bits of rubbish under the radar.

Accidental thermite reactions are a well-known phenomenon, he says. It just takes a lot of exposed surface area for the reaction to start

The key is this bit a lot of exposed surface area for the reaction to start we are talking about micron sized exposure.  Such accidents are indeed known to happen in fireworks factories where thermite is being prepared. They occur in some cases in metal workshops where grinding of suitable metals has gone on without enough cleaning up and occassionally the right combination of materials have been brought into sufficiently close contact. This in itself is a very tall order if you have ever tried to make thermite.  We are talking of something which still needs a significant ignition source which is of course available in a workshop from welding slag.  The bottom line is that anybody who wants to yap about an accidental thermite reaction having occurred in the WTCs is either profoundly ignorant of even the most basic chemistry or is clearly trying to decieve.

Well since I already know Natalie is profoundly ignorant of any science I shall have to give her the benefit of the doubt on this one.

I like the bit above where she says she cannot understanding the nitpicking.  Why then is she doing it?

You claimed that there was no real source for the fall times of about 10 seconds.  Yet your own source mentioned it!

No, I said that NOBODY knows EXACTLY how long it took for the towers to fall.  I said that I could find no mention in the final NIST report of fall times, but they might have mentioned 10 seconds in the past, but it was only meant as an approximation.  I pointed out a video that shows first hand, the collapse from beginning to the point where it is still not done collapsing, and the counter is at about 11 seconds.  What more can I do?  What more does one need?

You claimed nobody was saying their were molten pools of steel.  A blatant falsehood as was immediately shown.

No, I claimed (via 9/11myths) that the accounts talking about molten metal were not as widespread as claimed.  That many of them were second hand, and that even the original source may not have actually been literally talking about “liquid” metal.  There is no photographic proof of flowing pools of steel, as far as I’ve seen anyway, and I would think that this would be a prized picture for a photographer or anybody.  But then again, suppose there were pools of metal.  Why is it that the ony reason for it you can imagine is thermate?

Would you be willing to consider the likelihood that there were quite a few vehicles and gosh only knows what other fuel sources present down there?  There is supposedly parking for 2000 cars/trucks below the towers.  I don’t know the exact lay-out of the parking, or how many vehicles were actually there, but it seems a significant source of heating, especially after reading about car engine fires and the melting of aluminum engine parts and steel hoods, even.  There is also no telling exactly what kind of furnace effects might have been generated by underground subway tunnels and elevator shafts or whatever.

You claimed that a hodgepodge of waffling theorising by Bazant, was proof that gravity and fire brought down the WTCs.  This is a deliberate attempt to mislabel a theory as a fact.

Hodgepodge of waffling theorizing?  ROFL.  I guess the next time an aeronautical engineer explains to me the reason a plane can fly, and uses all kinds of lift and drag coefficient formulas, I’ll tell him he’s crazy and call his “theory” a hodgepodge.  Yeah, I’ll build my own plane!  You’ll see.

I don’t think I called it proof, but I certainly maintain that it’s pretty much the best we got, and that it represents the view of probaby 99.9% of the world’s structural, civil, and fire engineers.  You, on the other hand are CONSTANTLY proclaiming that this or that is PROOF of something, and cased closed.

You have claimed that a long since discredited video of Osama Bin Laden is proof of his involvment when even the FBI don’t agree with you.

Yes, I think that this and several other transmissions are pretty convincing proof that he has admitted guilt, and in fact seems quite proud of it.  I think that in addition to this, there has been much corroborating evidence coming from detainees and other sources.  The fact that the FBI does not see fit to technically charge him for this particular crime at this time does not mean that practically everbody with half a brain in this world isn’t convinced of his guilt.  After all, he does seem to have somewhat of a record of blowing stuff up, and threatening us with horrible consequences.  But, he may have changed.

You didn’t answer my question from earlier, though.  Has any legitimate intelligence agency on earth come out and declared any of these communications/videos to be falsified?

Maybe they have, but I sure don’t remember hearing about it.

mmmmm........depleted uranium.

---------------------vv------------------- (content below this line added 8/5/06)

Before you incorporate the arguments put forth by the 9/11 “truth” movement into your daily interactions with friends and family, you may want to fact check them first, and consider them in the context of common sense.  You will be spared possibly permanent embarrassment if you simply run your revelation du jour through the following before opening your mouth at that party, or sending that email to that friend who still assumes you are sane. --- Natalie, the Fruit Bat.  mmmmm.......fruit

9/11 myths
Debunking 911
Peer reviewed papers debunking the “truth” movement.
(using Steven E. Jones’ standard for peer review) ;-)

16% of people believe in UFOs.  6% believe in bombs and missiles.

(most of this 6% don’t have more than a high school education and/or live in trailer parks) (not that there’s anything wrong with that—I don’t, and I used to!)

Not a single institute of Structural, Civil, Fire and Safety or Demolition Engineers on the planet agree with the controlled demolition theory.  Not a single institute of Architects on the planet agree with the controlled demolition theory.  Not a single institute of Engineers in any field on the planet agree with the controlled demolition theory.

Which begs the question— Why do you?  Oh yeah......faith.

--------------------- content below this line added 8/10/06 --------------------------

We all know that the select group of incredibly intelligent and talented people who are capable of designing and building huge structures such as the World Trade Center Twin Towers universally agree that a combination of airplane impact damage, heat from fire and gravity caused their collapse.

However, it should also be noted that another group of highly accomplished people, comprised of those that are capable of safely demolishing such structures, concurs.

Natsky ..............All of your last post was dissembling and even for you pathetic. 

I guess the next time an aeronautical engineer explains to me the reason a plane can fly, and uses all kinds of lift and drag coefficient formulas, I’ll tell him he’s crazy and call his theory a hodgepodge.

Natalie try to keep up here.  The difference with the theory of flight is that it is proven, ie; planes fly.  and that is the only reason flight is a proven fact.  The theory that airplanes fly is not needful of an aeronautical engineer to explain, it is quite simple.  There are not “all kinds of lift and drag coefficient formulas” Batgirl........^^......... There are a couple of simple formulas and a reasoned application of these to a simple observable concept.  The theory of Bazant, is apart from being deliberately vague and requiring several leaps of faith, not proven.  His theory is also not even peer reviewed from the look of it. hmm, now wasn’t that important to you batgirl?  You know why I think that is?  It is complete rubbish and nobody is going to even bother sullying themselves. 

I don’t think I called it proof, but I certainly maintain that it’s pretty much the best we got, and that it represents the view of probaby 99.9% of the worlds structural, civil, and fire engineers. You did indeed call it proof, you said that Bazant should win the million dollars which has as its sole condition the PROOF that fire alone could have brought down those buildings. Lie number..100?
You at least admit its the best you’ve got, ha ha, but it is certainly not good enough to impress anyone yet, let alone sceptics.  Your desperate and spurious claim that it is supported by 99% of engineers is complete rubbish.  Do you actually take the silence of 99% of the world’s engineers in these fields as being support for the official version?  You are breathtakingly deluded my girl! 

The media blackout on most who speak out is the first fact to be assimilated.  The official condemnation and outright destruction of anyone who dares to speak out, is another. Then we need to realise that already hundreds of perfectly reasonable and qualified people in all relevant fields have spoken out and added their names to the list of dissenters.  We might pause a moment to consider that only a very few engineers have actually come forward with any support for the official story and ALL OF IT IS QULIFIED.  They give qualified support do you hear me you bloody fool?  None of these people is even ready to stake his repuatation and say this is certainly what happened. That is asmoking gun on its own, because believe me, a few engineers have tried to come as close to supporting it as they can, yet they are not prepared to give it unqualified support. The same is not true of the increasing number of engineers and other professionals who are joining our ranks. They say clearly and without dissembling that the buildings were brought down with explosives. 

Lastly you dim dusty minded shill how about the 42% of Americans who recognise the truth?  Do you think maybe some of them might be structural engineers etc? 

The fact that the FBI does not see fit to technically charge him for this particular crime at this time does not mean that practically everbody with half a brain in this world isn’t convinced of his guilt.

No Natalie, only those people who have been taken in by the original propaganda feast about OBL are convinced that he was involved, but more and more are realising as we now know it was always a lie.. You see dearest, there isn’t any evidence of his involvment.  That is the FBI position, not that they have simply not charged him.  Anyone with half a brain would see you haven’t even got that much dear. OBL might have blown things up before, and he might even have liked to have done 911, but that doesn’t amount to his involvment. Oxymoron = Neo Con intellectual.

Yes a number of intelligence agencies and international observers have stated categorically the OBL videos are false.  I’ve found it before for you too Natalie, ages ago and am disinclined to go searching again, but will probably do so anyway.  More to the point Natalie, do you have a reference from even the CIA that IT IS a genuine OBL video? Since the FBI don’t consider it a genuine video of OBL, why would you?  Especially when his first appearance said he didn’t. 

I have a problem with the idea that OBL didn’t want to be noticed pulling this off.  You first try to paint him as an attention seeking megalomaniac yet would also assume he would want to “keep a low profile” after pulling off a historical attack like this.  Yet suspension of one’s reasoning once in a single paragraph is not enough for Natalie, she would have us now do so again and accept that a couple of months later OBL changed his mind and wanted to tell us about it after all. 
Is anybody else feeling this scenario is getting a bit surreal?

stop talking to natalie, please, and start talking to terry allen who shall follow bush historically.

Diggins

Terry Allen may be a sly enabler of the truth?

Perhaps by spouting her original gibberish she was trying to bring the truth to the forefront?  Maybe this is why she coins a few excellent turns of phrase for our use?  Clearly she cannot seriously have spent months researching, only to come out and describe the demolition and LIHOP/MIHOP theories were faith based while the official story was a fact. 

Maybe the author was being Ironic all along ?  If it were not for the lockstep behaviour of the Natalie one could almost be convinced that nobody could be that dumb really.

Maybe Nat is Terry Allen, have we ever considered that?  Nat could have written this piece; it is eminently believable.

Check out this sexy flash thing Natalie. Enjoy it sweet “Flagermus”.

mmmmm.........ZINN on the Federal Bureau of Intimidation

James Madison made the point way back. One of the founding fathers. They were not dumb. They may have been rich and white and reactionary and slave holders but they weren’t dumb. Madison said the best way to infringe on liberty is to create an external menace.

Well, not all of them are black bag breakers and enterers, many have quietly left, and others have blown the whistle. Colleen Rowley anyone ? Sibel Edmonds ?

Strange goings on indeed.

Diggins
Ole frog recommended weeks ago that you look at terry’s other 12 articles at ITT . LOOK !

Natalie says:

“I�m no expert on anything scientific, really, but this just seems goofy to me.”

so far, Natty, you have done a pretty good job of refuting rabbit and co.’s scientists with your own scientists.  this at least makes the argument a scientific one, left to people who know what they are talking about, at least more so than most of the rest of us.

we know you are not an expert on the scientific, you have already pointed this out.  one point i do want to make, though, is that you can’t refute science by calling it ‘goofy’.  you’ve done well up to this point in arguing your points by using ‘expert testimony’, if you will.  don’t start slipping now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W21MutyXOew&mode=related&search;Don Henley - Inside Job

Perhaps Terry Allen contends that the truth shall set you free is actually a leap of faith.

I am not reading any of her other pieces until she prints a retraction, and ITT an apology.

Thanks for the response Natalie.

Here’s the rebuttle:

1) The final NIST report says as to heat damage to the towers’ steel:

Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250�C� Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 �C. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 �C.  (NIST, 2005, pp. 176-177) .

2) The reason why 9/11 Truth members pay practically zero attention to fire proofing is because structural steel is tested without fire proofing, as it was with the towers by UL. Fire proofing or no fire proofing in the towers is a diversion from what brought down the towers. 

3) If my oven were a) made of certified structual steel and its sides could b) hold twenty times there weight and it had a central core that had c) five times excess load capacity (as did the towers), I think my stove would not have collapsed/saged/etc as did the south tower after 56 minutes of temperaturs and loads way, way below what was needed to collapse it (the north tower collapsed in 97 minutes).

4) The towers were built with I-Beams for the floor supports, not lightweight trusses. See link below of WTC towers’ construction:

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/they-lied-about-trusses.htm

5)No arguments with your timeing of WTC 7. However, as the penthouses were sinking, then the main body of the building followed. This main body constituted 47 floors, and it collapsed in 6.6 seconds! Again, I ask, how did 47 floors collapse at near freefall speed to the ground?

6) As for 9/11 Truth members who ascribe UFOs, the Illuminati, Zionism, etc. as responsible for 9/11, well, you have me on that one! There out there all right, but on the edge of the fringe of the movement. Most 9/11 Truth members like to stick to the evidence, not hypotheses. We like to leave the hypotheses to government agencies like FEMA and NIST!

Regards,

Dean

Dean/brian

Good rebuttal of our much-loved USEFUL SHILL

I’ve been hugging those “lightweight trusses” to myself since joining the previous 911 thread late last year. . But they had to come out here sometime .

The expression itself implies such fragility that OF COURSE it all “fell” down.

Diggins
Did you read rabbit’s post of early this morning ?
And my two ?

Ooh la la—I’m back with the cheese-eating surrender-monkey frogflag ....

Thought I would just add my 2 cents worth to all the speculation about 9/11. I happened to be watching and taping MSN/CNBC that morning when the host of Squawk Box, Mark Haines, interrupted their guest and announced the report that a plane had struck one of the WTC towers. 

Yesterday I looked at the tape for the first time since then.

The announcement and first view came shortly after (about 5 minutes?). The time on the screen was 8:50 Eastern U.S..

I fast forwarded to when the first tower fell.

On the air a woman reporter on the scene was relating to the studio what she saw � she interrupted herself and announced an explosion with, �Oh my God!�

�Did you see it?�

�I heard it and can smell it.� (smoke was too heavy to see anything)

It was speculated that another plane hit the tower down low.

They switched to a male reporter on the other side of the building � Walter Perez on WNBC who said, �We�re not sure exactly what happened, but there was another explosion on the far side of where we�re standing.�

Then they went back to CNBC and Haines said, �The tower has collapsed! We heard from them before that another jetliner has crashed into the building way down low and that was apparently enough to take the building down. The building is gone. They can�t see it because they are completely enveloped in smoke up close.�

The time between �Oh my God!� when the explosion was heard (actually the collapsing I guess) and the time when Haines announced it was gone was 40 seconds according to the time in the lower corner of the screen.

My first thought and out loud comment to the TV was, �There had to be a bomb!� Thinking one more plane down low might have been carrying a bomb. I could not see how another plane (as they reported erroneously) just crashing could immediately do the job.

While watching it unfold live and in real time I did not notice something I saw yesterday � people were already jumping very early and it was not being mentioned in the commentary.

I had the same feelings watching this once more that I had when I visited Dachau where I bought a book about the activities which took place there. (I still have not read that book.) Even though I had read about it many times and have talked with GIs who liberated a couple of other camps, actually being there gave it an immediacy and reality I had never felt before.

Today I attended the funeral of a friend, Dr. Charles Gray, who was at a death camp liberation and related the helplessness he felt at being confronted with so many for whom he was too late to do anything.

Hi Brian/Dean

Your points are once again on the ball and useful.  It is of course probable that the fires themselves reached around 800 degrees C, since organic fuelled fires can do so.  That the steel itself never went over 250 degrees is consistent with this of course, because in the time available there is no way enough heat could have been absorbed by the steel with it’s massive heat sink properties, to rise up to the full temperature of the fire. I’d hazard a guess and suggest that the 250 C spots were isolated even then, with such heat effects tapering sharply off from the point of flame contact.  The steel I beams used for trusses, and the box columns are huge.  Frankly even Thermite/Thermate would only have heated/melted the immediately contacted portion of steel, the heat dropping sharply away from the point of contact again. 

250 C is barely hot enough to roast a chook in the oven.

My impression is that a serious sized bomb was in the basements of the WTC’s which took out the core, like the experts suggested it should be done.  Then Thermate charges, possibly with cutting charges as well detonated in a timed sequence as usual for such jobs.  The Controlled Demolition experts describe this as being the right way to do it.  The observable evidence is consistent with this scenario.

What The Heck

Well done! I mean it man, that is very well done.  You have a piece of the puzzle right there in your hands and the rabbit is very proud of you.  Thanks for the info.  There has been reports from many people about the explosions, but I haven’t heard that exact one before.

why did bush say he saw the first plane hit the tower on tv when, from what I understand, there was no aired footage of that until after the second plane had hit?

because he lied when he said he saw it on tv before he went into the classroom

http://www.archive.org/details/Whats_The_Truth-How_Indeed_Did_The_Twin_Towers_Co ollapse

this video has a few good demonstrations with thermite at about 50 minutes into the video and at 54 minutes clear footage of some thermite pouring out of