Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Justice

Was Thermite Used On The 9-11

Recommended Posts

I don’t know if this video clip is for real as it seems to have taken a long time to surface but if it is real then it presents conclusive proof that Thermite was used in the demolition of the twin towers.

See the clip yourself and watch metal dripping from the tower about 5 seconds in to the clip

Now anyone that can demonstrate how to melt steel by pouring tons of kerosene on it please step forward and present your scientific evidence as I’m all ears.

_41388709_buncefield_pa203.jpg

because this petrol fire that burnt for several days didn’t manage to melt the metal around it and that was only a centimetre thick.

As times goes by more and more bits of the big picture are fitting together and whilst it’s hard to change ones first impressions that were carefully choreographed well in advance to fool us all, only stubborn people and those with their heads in the sand will be left believing the official story and when GW-Bush is taken off to jail, these people will tell you that it was a conspiracy to set him up for the 9-11 murders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guy_Montag

I don’t know if this video clip is for real as it seems to have taken a long time to surface but if it is real then it presents conclusive proof that Thermite was used in the demolition of the twin towers.

See the clip yourself and watch metal dripping from the tower about 5 seconds in to the clip

Now anyone that can demonstrate how to melt steel by pouring tons of kerosene on it please step forward and present your scientific evidence as I’m all ears.

_41388709_buncefield_pa203.jpg

because this petrol fire that burnt for several days didn’t manage to melt the metal around it and that was only a centimetre thick.

As times goes by more and more bits of the big picture are fitting together and whilst it’s hard to change ones first impressions that were carefully choreographed well in advance to fool us all, only stubborn people and those with their heads in the sand will be left believing the official story and when GW-Bush is taken off to jail, these people will tell you that it was a conspiracy to set him up for the 9-11 murders.

I'm not convinced that it is metal dripping & not fuel or something.

But if it is, thermite is a mixture of iron filings & aluminium powder. As we all know buildings are built using steel & aeroplanes are made of aluminium. I imagine (but I don't know) that some sort of similar reaction could have been set up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think thermite is iron oxide (rust) and aluminium powder anyway I don't believe this is a particularly useful avenue for official story sceptics. The reports on the matter always claim that a chunk of the towers strength came from an outer jacket that was obviously breached by the planes. The effects of the momentum of a large airliner are also hard to quantify in relation to other steel framed building fires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm quite prepared to believe that the US government (and our own) was criminally negligent in failing to protect their citizens from this kind of predictable attack from the Islamofascists.

I'm prepared to believe (if offered concrete evidence) that the US government would sacrifice it's people to gain a Casus Belli on a foreign power. This was done in order to gain entry into WW2.

However remote control planes, pre set charges, missiles are imho pure tin foil hat stuff.

The discovery channel ran a complete program that looked at the destruction of the twin towers with comentary by well respected structural engineers.

The buildings were never designed to withstand the impact of a jumbo jet crashing into it. The fire retardant insulation was simply physically destroyed by the impact (light sheet material was used) and scattered by the ensuing fireball.

From that point on the structural inegrity of the building was gone and the eventual collapse inevitable.

Which is more credible

1) Al Quada or an al Quada affiliated Islamofascist group of fanatical nut jobs hijacked planes and flew them into the Twin Towers. Bearing in mind a) they had previously attempted to attack the targets, B ) they have previously shown that their operatives are prepared to die to carry out their goals.

2) The Americans secretly rigged up the buildings with thermite, C4, (insert high explosive/incendiary of your choice) and detonated them at the exact time 2 jumbo jets were slammed into the building by terrorists (unless you believe the planes were remote controlled of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However remote control planes, pre set charges, missiles are imho pure tin foil hat stuff.

Didn't you see 'The Lone Gunmen'? If only Intel had given them an Octium chip they could have saved the World Trade Center.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solvent Celt

I'm prepared to believe (if offered concrete evidence) that the US government would sacrifice it's people to gain a Casus Belli on a foreign power. This was done in order to gain entry into WW2..

But the news back in 1942 was not showing how America planned to enter WWII but we all know better now and I think it would be quite easy to plant changes and trigger them off as the plane hit the towers given FEMA, CIA and ???????

I once read that you only need two tons of explosives to bring the towers down so a ten man team could get the stuff into the build over a few days without anyone knowing and when you add to that GW-Bush’s brother, Marvin Bush

was on the board of directors for the company that was providing security at the twin towers, it’s easy to see how it can be done.

The discovery channel ran a complete program that looked at the destruction of the twin towers with comentary by well respected structural engineers.

But you will also find many “well respected structural engineers” who don’t go with the official story by a long shot and what would you say about WT7 that was not hit by a plane coming down too.

What other enginners say

"Many researchers, including Steven E. Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young University and Judy Wood, a mechanical engineer at Clemson University claim that the fall of the towers violates conservation of momentum.[28] In addition, Dr. Jones believes that the angular momentum of the top of the South Tower as it began to collapse could not simply disappear, unless the center of mass of the top was was somehow shattered and destroyed.[29] In addition, he believes that the rapid descent of the towers at near free fall speeds indicates that the undamaged central core below the collapse lost its structural integrity almost instantly and provided almost no resistance whatsoever to the falling debris. Official theorists have explained this near free fall collapse as either the "pankcake" theory of multiple falling floors progressively collapsing on top of one another, or as the "piledriver" theory, where the kinetic energy of the falling tower is simply too great and the steel columns below the impact simply shatter without resistance.[30] However, as previously mentioned, no official study has yet attempted to quantitatively explain the collapse pattern of both towers and WTC 7, and as such these theories have not been adequately proven."

We can play all day where I can say the building had only been sold a few months before 9-11, insurance cover was increased by a factor of three and I’m sure you could say it’s just a coincidence and this can go on forever but ask yourself why 100% of the people believed what they were told on 9-11 and now 40% openly question what happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solvent Celt

But the news back in 1942 was not showing how America planned to enter WWII but we all know better now and I think it would be quite easy to plant changes and trigger them off as the plane hit the towers given FEMA, CIA and ???????

I once read that you only need two tons of explosives to bring the towers down so a ten man team could get the stuff into the build over a few days without anyone knowing and when you add to that GW-Bush’s brother, Marvin Bush

was on the board of directors for the company that was providing security at the twin towers, it’s easy to see how it can be done.

But you will also find many “well respected structural engineers” who don’t go with the official story by a long shot and what would you say about WT7 that was not hit by a plane coming down too.

What other enginners say

We can play all day where I can say the building had only been sold a few months before 9-11, insurance cover was increased by a factor of three and I’m sure you could say it’s just a coincidence and this can go on forever but ask yourself why 100% of the people believed what they were told on 9-11 and now 40% openly question what happened.

It's one thing not to pass on intelligence of a coming Japanese attack in 1942 and quite another to suggest deliberate mass murder.

I'll buy criminal negligence but deliberate mass murder of US Citizens is a step too far. It's too big a conspiracy.

I mean why bother? It's not as though al quada wouldn't have provided them with another pretext.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's one thing not to pass on intelligence of a coming Japanese attack in 1942 and quite another to suggest deliberate mass murder.

I'll buy criminal negligence but deliberate mass murder of US Citizens is a step too far. It's too big a conspiracy.

But not warning the commander in pearl harbour about the attack did result in mass murder

I mean why bother? It's not as though al quada wouldn't have provided them with another pretext.

Bush wanted an excuse to make a grab for the oil and to ensure petodollars continued to flow so what better way than to create an enermy who will play along with you or do you not know about the links between GB-Bush and the Saudi Royals and the link to bin-ladens.

Who was the fisrt people allowed to fly out the USA after 9-11 ? would you remind me please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But not warning the commander in pearl harbour about the attack did result in mass murder

To an extent but it wasn't US planes bombing their own ships was it?

It was indirect.

Bush wanted an excuse to make a grab for the oil and to ensure petodollars continued to flow so what better way than to create an enermy who will play along with you or do you not know about the links between GB-Bush and the Saudi Royals and the link to bin-ladens.

Who was the fisrt people allowed to fly out the USA after 9-11 ? would you remind me please

Petro dollars were already flowing and an unstable middle east does nothing for cheap oil. If cheap oil was the issue then why not relax sanctions etc on Iraq and draw their oil into the world market? Iraq had a massive national debt after the Iran-Iraq war and Gulf War 1. It needed to sell oil to make the payments.

The Islamo fascists would have provided another attrocity without the need for US action.

I don't know. Bin Laden Family, other wealthy Arabs? Israeli mossad operatives? Lord Lucan?

If the grab is for Oil then why attack Afghanistan? Why not Saudi Arabia?

Was 7/7 also a government conspiracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To an extent but it wasn't US planes bombing their own ships was it?

It was indirect.

So if as we know the Americans had an 8 point plan to force japan into war and tried all eight before japan decided to attack and the trusted leaders failed to even pass on information from Winston Churchill, does this not make the leaders of the country complicit in murder since the war had not been declared ! I say that’s it does and if they would do this all them years ago then what do you think they would do today.

Petro dollars were already flowing and an unstable middle east does nothing for cheap oil. If cheap oil was the issue then why not relax sanctions etc on Iraq and draw their oil into the world market? Iraq had a massive national debt after the Iran-Iraq war and Gulf War 1. It needed to sell oil to make the payments.

You miss the point, it's not about cheap oil for america it's about increasing the value of oil for the Bush's personal holding (Yes they are Texans oil giants) and the Saudi royals who help pull it off also want oil to go up. American people themselves gain nothing apart from the new world order being a little bit closer. Banks get more petrodollars and the military loves the extra spending it’s receiving.

The Islamo fascists would have provided another attrocity without the need for US action.

Yes i hate em as much as you do, i hate snakes but i hate people more that would put a snake in my bed whilst i'm asleep.

I don't know. Bin Laden Family, other wealthy Arabs? Israeli mossad operatives? Lord Lucan?

Bingo number one, must i provide a link for you to beleive me and why do you not think the CIA would not want to question close family members before they were allowed to leave the USA, we get ID cards and they get a free past to fly, does this not sound strange to you.

If the grab is for Oil then why attack Afghanistan? Why not Saudi Arabia?

Afghanistan is controled for drugs money and since we invaded the amount of drugs comeing out has gone up by a factor of Three (flash back Oliver North) and GW-Bush and daddy have received ton's of money from the saudi royals, these are partners in crime to the Bushes. again do ask for links if you don't beleive me or can not find them.

Was 7/7 also a government conspiracy?

Personally I don’t think it was but I know some do, I think it was the enemy within that we are going to have to deal with more and more because sooner or later they will be demanding an Islamic state within the UK and carrying out bombing to try and get one, a quick look around the world at countries that have a large minority of Muslims should convince you I’m right.

Are you starting to get the picture

Anyone can be the president of america :lol::):lol::)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not convinced that it is metal dripping & not fuel or something.

Take another look, fuel burning looks different to iron coming out of a smelting pot. What I see is something I’ve seen when I watch metal being cut with a cutting touch and please note the petrol fire i shown at the top of the thread did not melt steel 1cm think, never mind 3" .it could be Aluminium as this melts quite low but it’s way below the impact zone where the plane hit i thinks.

No I don’t think it was a hologram that hit the towers or Elvis lives on the moon but I do think crap like that is disinformation put out by the FBI to discredit anyone that will not except the official story but out.

well over half the population in the UK believe princess Di was bumped off and yet we are so powerless, controlled that officials will not answer the simplest of questions on the subject and yet they have been caught lying time and time again on this particular subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and this seems quite convincing to me..

Pentagon: Hunt the Boeing

Well, they have got the aircrafts angle of entry completly wrong also there are pictures on the net where you can CLEARLY see where the wings hit the pentagon wall, at an angle.

As for the metal, that definately looks like metal allright, but I don't really know what to make of it. I would like to see a proper investigation and small scale simulation of the event however. As always, history will reveal all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also read somewhere that to make the necessary turn that would of been required to come in at such a low level without stalling the aircraft would of required a lot of experience and expertise. Which apparently the hijacker didn't have. Could be a rumour though.

Can't be easy flying an unfamiliar jet at 500 miles an hour 2 feet above the ground, can it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if as we know the Americans had an 8 point plan to force japan into war and tried all eight before japan decided to attack and the trusted leaders failed to even pass on information from Winston Churchill, does this not make the leaders of the country complicit in murder since the war had not been declared ! I say that’s it does and if they would do this all them years ago then what do you think they would do today.

You miss the point, it's not about cheap oil for america it's about increasing the value of oil for the Bush's personal holding (Yes they are Texans oil giants) and the Saudi royals who help pull it off also want oil to go up. American people themselves gain nothing apart from the new world order being a little bit closer. Banks get more petrodollars and the military loves the extra spending it’s receiving.

Yes i hate em as much as you do, i hate snakes but i hate people more that would put a snake in my bed whilst i'm asleep.

Bingo number one, must i provide a link for you to beleive me and why do you not think the CIA would not want to question close family members before they were allowed to leave the USA, we get ID cards and they get a free past to fly, does this not sound strange to you.

Afghanistan is controled for drugs money and since we invaded the amount of drugs comeing out has gone up by a factor of Three (flash back Oliver North) and GW-Bush and daddy have received ton's of money from the saudi royals, these are partners in crime to the Bushes. again do ask for links if you don't beleive me or can not find them.

Personally I don’t think it was but I know some do, I think it was the enemy within that we are going to have to deal with more and more because sooner or later they will be demanding an Islamic state within the UK and carrying out bombing to try and get one, a quick look around the world at countries that have a large minority of Muslims should convince you I’m right.

Are you starting to get the picture

Anyone can be the president of america :lol::):lol::)

I can go for the "knew in advance and did nothing" scenario but not active participation.

Logically it makes no sense. It doesn't require the buildings to collapse to be a Casus Belli.

Expensive oil is against America's national self interest as a net consumer of oil.

If control of Iraqi oil is the issue why did Bush senior not simply drive on to Baghdad in GW1.

If driving up Oil price is the issue he could have achieved more by attacking Saudi Arabia. American soldiers occupying Mecca and Medina would have caused greater unrest in the Muslim world. Many of the hijackers were Saudi's. Saudi sponsered Wahabism is a moving force behind the Jihadi movement.

The Taliban effectively stopped the poppy harvest in Afgahnistan... why would the US want a flood of heroin onto the world market?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can go for the "knew in advance and did nothing" scenario but not active participation.

Logically it makes no sense. It doesn't require the buildings to collapse to be a Casus Belli.

It was all made for TV. Fantastic as the first impact ensured the second plane would be filmed by all the news networks of the world. Total shock a awe for the masses and straight out of Hollywood. Later we need a little anthrax story as a diversion from asking too many questions whilst the crime scene was being brushed over.

Expensive oil is against America's national self interest as a net consumer of oil.

Not if you control most the oil in the world with your Saudi friends, the friends that provide Mr Bad cop bin-laden to kick things off.

If control of Iraqi oil is the issue why did Bush senior not simply drive on to Baghdad in GW1.

Good question and I don’t know the answer but maybe they believed Sadam would play ball with them all after bearing their teeth but he didn’t so hence GW2

If driving up Oil price is the issue he could have achieved more by attacking Saudi Arabia. American soldiers occupying Mecca and Medina would have caused greater unrest in the Muslim world. Many of the hijackers were Saudi's. Saudi sponsered Wahabism is a moving force behind the Jihadi movement.

The Saudi royals control the country but the average man on the street hates the royals, the royals are the Bush’s best friends and that’s no secret and are partners in crime to the attack on 9-11 so why would Bush attack them when they are such good puppets.

The Taliban effectively stopped the poppy harvest in Afgahnistan... why would the US want a flood of heroin onto the world market?

Are you questioning if more drugs are coming out the country than ever before or do you not remember the name Oliver North ! this is not debatable but on the public record if you care to read it.

so many paths lead to this being an inside job and back to GW-Bush that i Honestly believe he will be arrested or bumped off because this is not going to go away and if they do indeed have credible evidence that would stand up to scrutiny then why have we not seen it yet or must 99.9% question what happened before we get a chance to officially question those people who failed to protect/murdered it’s own people on 9-11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bah. It was the ILLUMINATI I tell you, the ILLUMINATI.

Now I will have to kill you all for knowing the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Logically it makes no sense.

Since when has that stopped a conspiracy theorist?

Someone who believes they can bring the WTC down with two tons of explosives, but doesn't believe that a 150 ton airliner travelling at 500mph crashing into the building and spraying the interior with 100 tons of burning jet fuel can do the same is hardly concerned with logic.

I think there's more than enough evidence that at least some people in the US government knew about the 9/11 plan ahead of time and may actively have tried to disrupt investigations that could have stopped it, but the idea that anything other than an airliner crashing into the building was responsible for the WTC collapse is just silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark, type in wtc 7 into Google. Over 11 million pages. It's not logical that a building NOT hit by the planes collapses all by itself as if in a controlled demolition. I do not go along with too much of the conspiracy theory but that building collapsing just does not make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not go along with too much of the conspiracy theory but that building collapsing just does not make sense.

Can you explain what you're claiming here? Why exactly would Bush blow up a building other than the main WTC towers? Was that where the smoking man was keeping the bodies of the aliens?

And a building which was on fire and where the fire-fighters pulled out because it couldn't be saved without getting even more of them killed, at that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you explain what you're claiming here? Why exactly would Bush blow up a building other than the main WTC towers? Was that where the smoking man was keeping the bodies of the aliens?

And a building which was on fire and where the fire-fighters pulled out because it couldn't be saved without getting even more of them killed, at that?

You are right to be skepticle, it is unthinkable that any civilised country could do such a thing!

"The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Especially if it is repeated over and over."
-- Adolph Hitler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arghhh!

An extremist/nutty/dangerous Islamist group tried to blow up the Twin Towers as they think the US is the great Satan, with all its liberty and prosperity.

Bill Clinton does sod all about this, other than launching a couple of cruise missiles and wringing his hands.

The terrorists have plenty of chums and cash, so they come back again 8 years later with suicide bombers in big planes and have another go, this time succeeding.

Weirdly, the new president gets all the blame even though i) it was the terrorists and ii) the previous president had done very little to tackle the Islamist terror threat.

So, the new president takes the threat seriously, and starts to show the world that the US is serious about 1) liberty, 2) free market economics (i.e. they continue buying oil, using the oil to run transport systems and machines, produce goods and services etc etc), and 3) eliminating terrorists.

Where's the conspiracy here? Everyone's cards are on the table as far as I can tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 337 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.