Controlled demolition: disinfo?

by **Qutb** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 10:10 pm

Re: Marvin I'm not saying it's uninteresting, but he's just a member of the board of directors there. It's not much in the way of evidence of anything. And how do you suppose he brought that up at the board meeting: Listen, Dubya is planning this fake terrorist attack... I mean, I know nothing about Stratesec, or whether they are part of the privatized intelligence infrastructure. If they are, then Marvin's directorship is significant. If they aren't, it probably isn't. Anyway, he was only director until 2000. I think Jonathan and Riggs is a lot more interesting than Marvin and Stratesec. But the fact that Marvin was also director of one of the insurance carriers for the WTC, hmm, that is a curious coinkidink. My stance on the CD issue is that it's unlikely, impossible to prove or to find any good evidence of, and ultimately of no great importance. We still don't know the details of how the JFK assassination was carried out, and we never will. We'll never settle this CD issue either, but we'll probably waste a lot of time arguing over it <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **Dreams End** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 10:15 pm

I might want to clarify if folks reading this thread don't get it. Qutb is not supporting the whole mythology of 9/11...just doubting the demolition part of it. So arguments about other elements of 9/11 aren't needed unless you just want comments on them.

by **Qutb** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 10:26 pm

Yes, DE, I should perhaps have been more explicit about that. I'm in the conspiracy camp regarding 9/11, no doubt about that <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> But I like to have some evidence to base my opinions on. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **cortez** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 1:00 am

<img src="http://www.911blogger.com/files/images/beenliedto_thumb.jpg" style="border:0;"/> ‘You are being lied to’ featuring a bunch of eye witness comments referring to explosions inside of the WTC. I personally hadn’t seen quite a few of these clips, so it may be worth checking out. Link to <a href="http://www.mypetgoat.tv/video/Bomb_Montage.WMV">Video</a> <a href="http://www.911blogger.com/2005/08/eyewitness-reports-to-explosions-in.html">www.911blogger.com/2005/08/eyewitness-reports-to-explosions-in.html</a> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=cortez@rigorousintuition>cortez</A> at: 10/3/05 11:01 pm

by **cortez** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 1:11 am

This video should be viewed if possible, do you hear what I hear? <img src="http://terrorize.dk/911/wtc2dem1/watch.frame.jpg" style="border:0;"/> <a href="http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc2dem1/wtc.2.demolitio.south.closeup.zoomout.avi">Link to Video</a> this is the sound only from from the video above of the south tower .<a href="http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/wtc-south-tower.aif">audio link</a> this is the sound from a demolition in detroit, the hudson building (pretty sure that’s what it is) <a href="http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/jhudson1.aif">audio link</a> There are many more videos from a variety of angles which bring into question how the towers collapsed. ----- some of this info is from a thread on this <a href="http://www.gnn.tv/forum/thread.php?id=6031&page=14&sort=_created_dt&dir=ASC">board</a> ------------- Premature Detonations of Explosives? <img src="http://italy.indymedia.org/uploads/2005/04/premature-detonations.gif" style="border:0;"/> Below is an example of what demolition squibs look like, when they fire off <img src="http://terrorize.dk/misc/demolition/southwark.towers.gif" style="border:0;"/> ------------- <img src="http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/video/wtc7/hsw_implosion.gif" style="border:0;"/> <img src="http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/video/wtc7/wtc7_collapse_lg.gif" style="border:0;"/> --- OK, I'm all done and I apologise to anyone who has been through the ringer on the Controlled Detonation debate. The only way to really look at the evidence, is to look at it (as imperfect as it may come to us) and draw our conclusions. It should be obvious I have drawn mine. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=cortez@rigorousintuition>cortez</A> at: 10/4/05 12:17 am

by **maggrwaggr** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 2:22 am

Until I finally went back, quite by accident, and saw the video of WTC7 falling. It is so obviously a controlled demolition I don't know how any one can argue it. Even the NIST guys had a REAL hard time rationalizing that one, and they admitted as such. Keep in mind the job of the NIST was not to find a real reason that the buildings collapsed, but to rationalize how they COULD have collapsed ASSUMING that WTC1 and WTC2 were hit by planes and WTC7 was hit by, well, not much at all except possibly a few chunks of debris and wiith a small fire burning. All of their "results" were based on those assumptions. They did NOT think out of the envelope, that was not their job, or even part of their assignment. So everything they came up with is based on "well, gosh, WTC7 fell down in a total pancaking collapse and by golly we're sure scratching our heads as to why that happened but here's what MUST have happened for that to have occurred." So they invent these things of what MUST have happened, when in reality they don't have any more evidence than you or I. I still am slightly on the fence about WTC's 1 and 2 only because I feel like I simply have to be -- because no other occurrence of its kind has ever happened -- i.e. a large passenger jet filled with fuel ramming full speed into such a building. It's simply never happened before. However, that doubt is only at about 2%. I'm 98% sure it was all brought down on purpose, the whole thing was an inside job, a collaboration of the Bush administration and the Saudis, the people who really own this country. Oh, and if you haven't watched "Loose Change" yet, that's very convincing to, because they do an excellent job of showing the MOST UNUSUAL systematic explosions happening several stories down from the collapse of both Twin Towers. As the buidling falls, there are systematic explosions below the actual "pancake zone", just BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, leading the collapse. Watch "Loose Change" if you have any doubt about the MIHOP scenario.

by **ewastud** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 2:45 am

My background is in architecture and construction, and I have been skeptical of the controlled demolition hyposthesis because it seemed to add unnecessary complexity to the explanation of how the towers fell (defied the principle of Occam's Razor). The orthodox explanation seems to have been a satisfactory explanation to me for the destruction of at least the two towers. If the towers had been felled by explosives, then one would have to explain how the explosives got planted without raising suspicions. I have read on the Wayne Madsen Report recently of intelligence Madsen has claimed to have received which lends more credence to the CD hypothesis: "[John] O’Neill’s FBI colleague, Mike Dick, aggressively investigated this Israeli ring before and after 911. But likeO’Neill, he soon found himself removed from his duties on the orders of the then-head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division Michael Chertoff. Dick was very suspicious when Israeli movers quickly moved Zim American Israeli Shipping Company out of its 10,000 square feet of office space on the 17th Floor of the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The partially Israeli state-owned firm forfeited a $50,000 security deposit when it terminated its lease and vacated the building one week prior to 911. According to a non official cover (NOC) CIA source who worked with Dick, Israeli movers moved explosives into the 17th Floor office space after Zim moved out." <a href="http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/Baffles.htm">www.waynemadsenreport.com/Baffles.htm</a> This 9/11-related link above may be very enlghtening to regular RI frequenters. It is highly recommended. Madsen seems to have tied up a lot of loose investigative ends into a more coherent whole.

by **maggrwaggr** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:03 am

What I find really disturbing at this point in time (well I find a lot of things disturbing actually) is that everybody totally ignores the WTC7 collapse. I was watching a show the other night -- I think it was on the National Geographic Network -- and it was all about 9/11, and they never ONE MENTIONED the collapse of WTC7. The collapse of WTC7 simply does NOT fit into the "mythology" of what happened that day. So it is ignored. What matters is the "myth". That we were attacked by terrorists who shaved their bodies and all of that. Oh, and that's another thing -- how the FUCK do they know which terrorists shaved their fucking bodies and which didn't? Don't tell me they found the perfectly preserved corpses of the pilots somewhere in the wreckage. It's utter bullshit. In fact, if you study it, you realize it's ALL utter bullshit. It's The Biggest Lie Ever. Ever.

by **firstimer** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:41 am

Nothing speaks louder than that video QTUB, but since you need more there is the issue of the diesel tank which supposedly supplied the generators that backed up the OEM center for NYC. Police and fire supposedly protested the installation of the tank for obvious safety reasons and building code violations. Can't find any record of such complaints pre Sept. 2001 can you?. As a matter of fact can't hardly find anything on WTC7 except conspiricy sites. Thats strange, a blatant lack of archival resources resulted from a standard search on google, all we got were conspiricy sites? Did ABC, CNN, FOX and CBS leave "prisonplanet" whatreallyhappened" and "911truth.org" in charge of remembering the details of WTC7? Not really, I suspect. Sometimes what is not on the internet is just as revealing as what is. BTW, I have been warned, no doubt from crusin here, its a good sign, they are worried. Inexplicable brand new Hummer sunken in the lynnhaven river (my backyard) and abandoned last weekend. No kidding, have pic's help me post them. firstimer

by **smiths** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:57 am

now i dont trust anyone when it comes to 9/11 related info but i did find this little snippet regarding zim, Firm's Move To Norfolk Will Create 235 New Jobs Shipping Company To Relocate Headquarters To Hampton Roads From New York City by Christopher Dinsmore The Virginian-Pilot [Norfolk, Virginia newspaper] April 3, 2001 Norfolk scored a major economic development victory Monday, taking a corporate headquarters from New York City. With great glee, Gov. Jim Gilmore confirmed Monday that the North American headquarters of Zim Israel Navigation Co. Ltd., the world's ninth-largest shipping company, will be moving to Norfolk from New York. Zim-American Israeli Shipping Co. Inc. will be relocating from the 16th floor of the World Trade Center I in Manhattan to a new $6.2 million building in the Lake Wright Executive Center. The company expects to open its new building by Sept. 4 and will eventually employ 235 people with an average annual salary of at least $35,000 in Norfolk. "While many other shipping companies have moved across the river to New Jersey, Zim looked nationally for the location best meeting our long-term business needs," said Shaul Cohen-Mintz, Zim-American's president, in a statement. "Norfolk emerged as an extremely attractive location." Gilmore and other state officials visited Norfolk on Monday afternoon to make the announcement in the Town Point Club at Norfolk's World Trade Center. Gilmore delivered a $100,000 check from his opportunity fund to the city to be spent on site preparation for the company's new building. The Gee's Group is building a 30,000- to 40,000-square-foot building at the Lake Wright park for Zim-American. "Adding this corporate headquarters is just one more jewel in the crown of this great city," said Barry Duval, Virginia's secretary of commerce and trade. Citing reports of a possible new Maersk-Sealand terminal in Portsmouth, the planned $61million expansion of Metro Machine Corp., growing cruise ship calls at Nauticus and "now this," Norfolk Mayor Paul D. Fraim said, "I think it says what a great place this is to do business." Zim-American plans to transfer 30 to 35 executives and department heads to Norfolk and hire locally to fill other positions at the headquarters, said Nadav Kaplan, Zim-American's project manager for the relocation. Kaplan said Zim-American began looking to move its headquarters in December 1999, starting with 129 cities. Norfolk was a finalist along with Houston and Richmond. Norfolk emerged as the victor after a February tour of the finalists by executives of the Israeli shipping company, he said. so, they made the announcement in early april, they say they had been lookin since 1999 and with the $6.5 million cost of the building the $50,000 broken lease doesnt seem so suspicios to me. having said that i still accept they may have had very timely inside info, its just that the fact they moved out a few days before the towers came down means nothing by itself. on another not did you see a zim ship had hit a fishing boat recently and fled the scene, captain denied it even though he had changed course at the crash site and had matching paint all over his hull

by **GDN01** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 4:21 am

I worked at Ground Zero as a crisis counselor - was there three different times for three days each, during the first, second, and third weeks after the attacks. I saw the twisted steel beams - beams thicker than a person's body twisted like pretzels. Steel beams that had been heated, and then the force of the fall had caused them to twist. The outer supports were designed to support a certain number of floors at a time - there were no single beams the full height of the buidling. I forget how many floors high each section was. But I was told the main supports were along the elevator shafts - and that was where the jet fuel poured down, and fire balls did go down the elevator shafts - that is in many reports. If those supports were heated by direct fire - maybe they did begin to buckle, causing the towers to collapse in on themselves. And I don't know who was standing on the pile 5 minutes after the towers fell, but the fire was still burning the third week I was there. The feet of search dogs were seared by the heat. The rescue workers's shoes would melt. I can't remember the numbers being thrown around, but I remember firemen saying they had never heard of fires burning at the temps. that were still registering, one and two weeks out. (I want to say well over 1,000 F - but that could be wrong.) The destruction area was immense. There was debris for city blocks and buildings damaged. And the pile of debris was many stories high - I don't know how many. But the first time I saw it, it was beyond comprehension. Blocks and blocks of utter destruction. And yes, the towers falling, the sheer weight of all this coming down - pulverized the cement and other materials. This ash was inches thick in the streets for blocks. The pile of debris was all twisted steel. What I heard from a variety of people there, engineers, fire men, port authority workers, was that the towers were designed to pancake in and fall in their footprints because the architects wanted to save the city if there ever was a catastrophic failure. And there were several other buildings brought down in those weeks. I was there for at least two. The buildings had been determined to be unstable and beyond repair. One of these buildings was several stories high and near WTC-7. I believe our govt. was involved. I'm not convinced the towers were brought down by explosives. I have always thought that they bit off more than they could chew - that they never intended the buildings to totally collapse. The planes crashing into the towers would have been enough. But maybe not. The towers coming down were symbolic of having the nation brought to it's knees. I have always thought I was a little too close to be completely objective. But having seen it, I can believe the towers collapsed from the damage done by the planes. I'm not completely convinced either way. And in some ways, whether the towers were brought down by explosives or not is not the key issue, what is more important to me is proving our govt. is responsible. Then we can focus on how.

by **Pants Elk** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 4:39 am

I'm amazed this is even being discussed here. Haven't we done our homework? Have we read nothing but newspapers? Looked at nothing but broadcast news? Structural analogy: the planes were like pencils being poked through a mosquito net. The towers were engineered and built to withstand this type of "trauma". Aviation fuel burns quickly, and at temperatures too low to wreck the beams. The towers were already embedded with the means of their destruction (in order to safely demolish them at the end of their lives), something which Giuliani, of course, knew. Read "A New Pearl Harbor", listen to the engineers' and architects' and eye/ear witnesses' testimony - it's all out there. Just a few clicks away. And if that doesn't convince you, and if what you're seeing when you look at the filmed eveidence doesn't convince you, then ... vote Diebold. Of all the things I find hard to believe, it's seeing this discussion here.

by * » Tue Oct 04, 2005 5:08 am

"What I heard from a variety of people there, engineers, fire men, port authority workers, was that the towers were designed to pancake in and fall in their footprints because the architects wanted to save the city if there ever was a catastrophic failure." With all due respect GDN01, what you were subject to was the equivalent of viral marketing. No building in the history of the world has been designed with a catastophic collapse in mind because it had never happened before. Pre-911, any architect or engineer who suggested such a thing would have been laughed out of the room. The architect of the WTC, Minoru Yamasaki, was an engineer who designed the building to withstand a plane crash (for which there WAS precedent). As a young architecture student in the mid-70's, I toured tower 2 with my design class when it was still an open skeletal structure. We got to witness (and breathe) the spraying of the asbestos coating on the framing members and stumble around 70+ stories high in hardhats. Our math teacher (also an engineer) was friends with Yamasaki. One of my former classmates was a systems manager in the complex and died there, though I didn't know that until two years later. My nephew worked three blocks from the WTC and was just emerging from the subway when the second plane hit. My sister didn't hear from him until after 2 pm when he had finally walked far enough north to find a working, unoccupied telephone. He got himself deputized by the Red Cross and and worked at the WTC site until Christmas.

by **Pants Elk** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 6:39 am

Something else: Occam's Razor actually shaves off the "official" version of events as soon as you plug it in. Of all the outlandish, ridiculous, insulting, cynical conspiracy theories to pretend to account for 9/11, the official version is, by some way, the worst, and the least credible. Listen - the vast, contented "moo-ing" of the herd, for whom yesterday isn't even a memory. Just get a faceful of grass, chew it on down, that's reality. Maybe there's a couple of hyenas out there on the periphery. Just troublemakers. Stay in the middle, keep your head down.

by **Qutb** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 8:54 am

"I'm amazed this is even being discussed here" Yes, we must not question 9/11 Truth dogma. What I'm saying is that the arguments and evidence supporting the CD hypothesis are a lot weaker than many people think. About the Israeli shipping firm - a shipping company chooses to relocate from the WTC in April, 2001, and that is proof of controlled demolition?? Companies had been abandoning the WTC for some time. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

Controlled demolition: disinfo?

Re: geez

Re: geez

Re: geez

some vids

Re: some vids

I used to scoff at the CD folks

Re: I used to scoff at the CD folks

thanks for the link

wtc 7 and cd

zim

Anecdotal info.

Re: Anecdotal info.

Anecdotal info

Re: Anecdotal info

Re: Anecdotal info.

Who is online