Gosh, golly, gee guys, you mean to say you don't trust our guv'ment ? Anybody
in here ever serve in the military?
Ask ole Ben Franklin why they didn't trust the king, They wrote the
constitution to protect us from guv'ment, not the other way around. Don't trust
the guv'ment.. don't even think
I wrote:
Please note they concur with the NIST findings.
And - you know this, how?
I know this because I read Japanese newspapers and watch the NHK news.
To be accurate, this is more a case of the dog that has not barked.
Let me explain.
The Japanese blogosphere and tabloid magazines are
Jones Beene wrote:
No one has suggested arson per se in this discussion.
By arson I meant the use of thermite or any other deliberate,
controlled demolition materials installed in the building beforehand.
Anything of this nature would be obvious to a trained fire inspector
at the NYPD or
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
You mean NIST and the NYFD and every other fire department and safety
agency on earth has chosen to ignore that. No doubt they are all part
of a grand conspiracy. Get used to it.
Huh? Every other fire department on earth? Get real - better yet
I hate to get involved in this cat fight, but when thermite is used,
it melts only a very local region which is blown away from the area by
the reaction. A molten pool of iron would not be produced. I suspect,
as others have suggested, that the huge energy of the collapse would
melt the
Ed -
You could be right - but the bottom line on it is that all we need, all we have
ever needed, is simply a thorough investigation which addresses all the issues.
Why were we not afforded that for the millions already spent?
If you have the time ... Please comment on the following criticism
Err guys, don't get carried away with the conspiracy - try to consider how long
a pool of molten metal would stay molten...
Mark Loizeaux, now president of CDI and one of the contractors in the
clean-up is quoted in newspaper accounts and television interviews in the weeks
following 9/11 as
on 7/9/08 9:19 pm, Stephen A. Lawrence at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone here attempted to answer the following three questions? The
first two would involve a little tedious research but are otherwise
straightforward, but the most important -- #3 -- seems hard.
1) How much energy is
Nick
You must be reading my mind ;-)
That is why this subject could be directly On Topic
Seriously, though - WTC7 was a large repository for precious metals. Check out
this image:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/gold.html
... not sure how much of it was palladium, however g
I wonder how much molten steel was produced by cutting tourches etc. during
the clean up.
Harry
On Sep 8, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
Ed -
You could be right - but the bottom line on it is that all we need,
all we have ever needed, is simply a thorough investigation which
addresses all the issues.
Why were we not afforded that for the millions already spent?
I suspect
Thank you, Harry!
Haven't gone over those numbers with a calculator and CRC yet but it
looks good at first glance -- and it provides a great place to start
even if I end up disagreeing!
Harry Veeder wrote:
A calculation can be found here near the end of the page:
Jones,
Metal fatigue can cause an airplane to crash but this wasn't fully
appreciated by the aircraft industry until the Comet disaster.
Is it so inconceivable that thermal expansion in conjunction with the design
of tower 7 caused the collapse?
Harry
Jones Beene wrote:
Mark Loizeaux, now president of CDI and one of the contractors in
the clean-up is quoted in newspaper accounts and television
interviews in the weeks following 9/11 as seeing molten steel in the
bottoms of elevator shafts three, four, and five weeks after the attack.
I do
Harry
As it is no-doubt obvious to all, I have no expertise in the specialized area
of disaster analysis or hi-rise engineering, and have only witnessed
demolitions on TV, therefore, I can only pass-on what I have read and studied.
Sure, I have a high level of interest and have read
Considering that I use thermite to MAKE molten pools of metal, as part
of a glass sculpture technique, that would be incorrect. The reaction
in large amounts doesnt blow things away. Thats standard aluminum /
iron (II) oxide thermite.
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Edmund Storms [EMAIL
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
As far as I know Mark Loizeaux has not claimed that any of the
buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition with materials
implanted before the attack. I am sure that he would recognize it
instantly if that were the case.
If you were
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Jones Beene wrote:
Mark Loizeaux, now president of CDI and one of the contractors in the
clean-up is quoted in newspaper accounts and television interviews in
the weeks following 9/11 as seeing molten steel in the bottoms of
elevator shafts three, four, and five weeks
Of course it would be incorrect if the demolition company wanted to
make molten iron. However, they generally try to use as little of the
expensive thermite as possible to get the job done. When a person
hears an explosion, as people claimed to do, this means that things
were blown away.
- Original Message
From: Stephen A. Lawrence
If there's something more concrete, which pins the temperature and the date a
little better, I'd love to see it.
Well, there was, but I am having trouble finding it now. Maybe you can help.
I remember seeing an image in the days (maybe
Jones Beene wrote:
If you were charged with doing a thorough investigation, would not
you at least interview him - hopefully with a grant of immunity from
future prosecution ?
I do not understand this comment. Why would he need a grant of
immunity?!? This makes no sense. He is not accused
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
I do not understand this comment. Why would he need a grant of
immunity?!? This makes no sense. He is not accused of bringing down
the buildings, is he?
Not that I am aware of - but that is FAR from his only problem.
... in case you are
Jones Beene wrote:
... in case you are unaware of it, it can be a serious crime in
itself to have evidence of another's serious crime EVEN IF YOUR ARE
NOT INVOLVED - and to fail to make some effort to report it. Does
accessory after the fact ring a bell?
Of course, he and many others who
Thermite isn't expensive, isnt an explosive, and the BY PRODUCTS OF
ITS USE, just when burnt on its own, is aluminum oxide and MOLTEN
iron. The use i mentions is, we use a few ceramic potters together,
with a thin sheet of aluminum between two, plugging the shared hole.
This is placed on top of a
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
You are saying he is committing a crime by not speaking up, and the
government is using this as a lever to prevent him from . . .
speaking up.
No of course not. The crime, if there was one (and that is not clear) -- would
have already been
Jones Beene wrote:
- Original Message
From: Stephen A. Lawrence
If there's something more concrete, which pins the temperature and
the date a
little better, I'd love to see it.
Well, there was, but I am having trouble finding it now. Maybe you can help.
I remember seeing
From a recent comment Jones made:
If you were charged with doing a thorough investigation, would not you at
least
interview him - hopefully with a grant of immunity from future prosecution ?
FWIW,
I'm reminded of what a number of UFO investigators have tried to do
when it came to the
Stephen,
However, remote sensing can't see high temperatures through an opaque
mass of debris. At wavelengths emitted by very hot objects, which are
in the visible band, it can only read the *surface* temperature.
Yes but... Here is a page with a tiny version of the same or a similar
Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please note they concur with the NIST findings.
And - you know this, how?
I know this because I read Japanese newspapers and watch the NHK news.
After all, the whitewash has only been out a few
days, and yet these thousands of agenicies . . .
The
Jones Beene wrote:
Stephen,
However, remote sensing can't see high temperatures through an opaque
mass of debris. At wavelengths emitted by very hot objects, which are
in the visible band, it can only read the *surface* temperature.
Yes but... Here is a page with a tiny version of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Speaking of WTC 7, I saw the video of that building coming down, I know a
controlled demolition when I see one. It didn't fall down, it imploded.
Oh do you? Maybe so, and maybe not, but here are some people who
definitely do know a controlled demolition when they see
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
Why do you persist in creating ridiculous straw-men to demolish?
That is so juvenile. Is winning an argument more important to you than finding
the truth in these allegations?
No one has suggested arson per se in this discussion. We should all
Jones Beene wrote:
- Original Message
From: Jed Rothwell
Why do you persist in creating ridiculous straw-men to demolish?
That is so juvenile. Is winning an argument more important to you than
finding the truth in these allegations?
No one has suggested arson per se in this
WT-7 building imploded and fell in a classic figuration of a controlled
demolition event. The time lapse vids do not lie.
The destruction of the building has not been kept a secret .. it cannot be..
BUT.. it can be debunked. It was by the NIST report.
WTC firemen gave interviews on TV, their
- Original Message
From: Stephen A. Lawrence
My guess -- and it is nothing more than a guess -- is that a significant
fraction of the collapse energy *did* turn into heat, and that, in fact,
the amount of heat generated was large enough to melt a significant
amount of steel. But
Howdy Richard,
Howdy Steven,
I don't know why the 9/11 buildings collapsed because I wasn't there. One
building collapse under these circumstances does raise an eyebrow,,, two
buildings collapse under identical circumstances stretches the
imagination... 3 buildings collapse in like
Jed wrote:
And the NYFD rolled over and play dead. Because as we all
know officials in
New York City are timid and passive people who never
question authorities.
They are easily duped, and slavishly devoted to Republican
administration.
Plus, what would they have to gain? I mean, aside
Quoting Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Richard,
Won't matter.. it over,it's in the past.. in today's world, anything being
instant attention is past tense.
There are things which resonate, and those which don't. This doesn't.
Unfortunately, you are probably right - especially with the
Quoting Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Jones Beene wrote:
Won't matter.. it over,it's in the past.. in today's world, anything
being instant attention is past tense.
Unfortunately, you are probably right - especially with the massive
payoff$$
On the other
Kevin Ryan, former Lab director at UL (Underwriters Laboratories - which
once-upon-a-time was NIST - that is, before NIST became politicized and no
longer is staffed with real scientists - and instead is being run by political
appointees)
... weighs in with Dr. Steven Jones on the
Jones Beene wrote:
Kevin Ryan, former Lab director at UL (Underwriters Laboratories -
which once-upon-a-time was NIST - that is, before NIST became
politicized and no longer is staffed with real scientists - and
instead is being run by political appointees)
No, the two are completely
Howdy Jones,
Fact: NO plane hit building 7 of the world trade center so the computer models
used on the twin towers are invalid. What we
have is a classic example of performing wonders with numbers while eating
cucumbers.
Won't matter.. it over,it's in the past.. in today's world, anything
Richard,
Won't matter.. it over,it's in the past.. in today's world, anything being
instant attention is past tense.
Unfortunately, you are probably right - especially with the massive payoff$$ to
the families of the 3000+ victims - some of whom otherwise would never let the
story die. Is
A slow news day.
The following questions are probably directed for Jones, but anyone
can chime in.
I've been reading this subject thread off and on for some time, and
I'm curious about a couple of things...
Is it the implication that Cheney either directly or indirectly was
responsible for
, September 05, 2008 7:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:NIST debunking
snip What we
have is a classic example of performing wonders with numbers while eating
cucumbers. /snip
Jones Beene wrote:
Won't matter.. it over,it's in the past.. in today's world,
anything being instant attention is past tense.
Unfortunately, you are probably right - especially with the massive
payoff$$ to the families of the 3000+ victims - some of whom
otherwise would never let the
OrionWorks wrote:
A slow news day.
The following questions are probably directed for Jones, but anyone
can chime in.
I've been reading this subject thread off and on for some time, and
I'm curious about a couple of things...
Is it the implication that Cheney either directly or
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Jones Beene wrote:
Won't matter.. it over,it's in the past.. in today's world, anything
being instant attention is past tense.
Unfortunately, you are probably right - especially with the massive
payoff$$ to the families of the 3000+ victims - some of whom otherwise
Steven,
I've been reading this subject thread off and on for some time, and
I'm curious about a couple of things... Is it the implication that Cheney
either directly or indirectly was responsible for destroying the WTC and/or
surrounding buildings?
Never heard that one before.
WHO DID IT?
Thank you for the extremely lucid recap.
Jones Beene wrote:
[ snip ]
I mentioned before there had been a valid demolition permit issued by
the City to the WTC owners (the Port Authority) - after the 1993
incident - and there are reports from around that time period from
contractors that
Jones Beene wrote:
NIST, to everyone's utter amazement, totally dodged this issue; nor
did they address the large number of PROVED and documented reports
at the NYC Fire Dept has on file - of large pools of molten steel -
up to three weeks after the tragedy.
And the NYFD rolled over and
Jones Beene wrote:
I mentioned before there had been a valid demolition permit issued by
the City to the WTC owners (the Port Authority) - after the 1993
incident - and there are reports from around that time period from
contractors that themite was actually loaded into parts of the
Thousands of innocent people died on Sept 11, 2001. Most died quickly,
mercifully. But some I suspect died slowly and horribly. As human
beings it seems to be in our nature to ponder how devastating events
of this nature could be allowed happen. Why? We ask ourselves. SOMEONE
MUST HAVE BEEN
Howdy Steven,
I don't know why the 9/11 buildings collapsed because I wasn't there. One
building collapse under these circumstances does raise an eyebrow,,, two
buildings collapse under identical circumstances stretches the
imagination... 3 buildings collapse in like circumstances with no
54 matches
Mail list logo
