Help me COUNTER this "WTC was NOT a controlled demolition" argument

[CaptainMidnight]

Hi,

I have a discussion group via email, and after forwarding along articles to a friend regarding the WTC, which I believe was a controlled demolition, most likely controlled from WTC #7, and then that itself was blown up to destroy the evidence, she came up with some counter arguments.

I've referred my friend to the serendipity site regarding the WTC demolition, and the davesweb site, Center For An Informed America. If anyone here can help me refute her assertions, thank you:


1. The fire and collapse of WTC 7 has been laid to a store of diesel
fuel in the basement, to be used for the building's emergency
generator. It caught fire, and the NYFD had other things on its mind
that day besides putting it out. Left to its own devices, it
overwhelmed the building's sprinkler system and caused the collapse.

2. This conspiracy is too smart for its own good. If the conspirators
were sophisticated enough to smuggle the explosives into both
buildings and plant them strategically and get out without being
detected, why wouldn't they rig them in a way that WOULDN'T create a
symmetrical collapse? Which would raise suspicion?

3. The logic is flawed: the buildings LOOK like they collapsed in a
controlled demolition, so therefore there MUST have been a controlled
demolition. The article says that only 3 steel structures like this
have ever collapsed — and they all went down like a controlled
demolition. Maybe that's the way steel structures collapse. The only
other comparable steel skyscraper that's EVER been demolished was a
44-story building near Times Square back in the 50's I think. The
fact is these are relatively new structures so there isn't a lot of
experience with how these things respond to that kind of stress.
London and Berlin in 1940-1945 didn't have these kinds of structures,
and of course neither did Tokyo during that period.

4. I don't buy the logic of the conspirators. If they've already got
airliners smashing into buildings, why would they think they need the
additional issue of buildings collapsing in order to get their terror
message across? Do these theorists really believe that the collapse
of these buildings was necessary for Bush to trample on our civil
rights, etc.? That seems like a bizarre political calculation to
make. I'd say if you've got two skyscrapers with burning airliners
sticking out of them, that's already plenty enough.

5. Why bother with the airliners at all? Why not just blow up the
buildings and say it was Al Qaeda?  The airliner aspect had the
highest liklihood of failure anyway -- one of them almost missed the
WTC and another one, of course, went down in PA due to the heroism of
hte passengers.  Wouldn't it have looked a bit odd if the airliners
missed their target but the buildings suddenly collapsed anyway?


I just can't write the script for this one in a way that makes sense,
or that doesn't come off as a SNL sketch.

[La_Serpiente]

1. I am not sure what you are saying

are you saying that the World Trade Center Building was destroyed as a result of a conspiracy or is that the argument of the other side?

[greyl]

2. No thanks. The PBS special about this was very convincing

for your opponents point of view.

[onebigbadwulf]

3. Agreed

The PBS special explains how when all the fire retardant material was blown off the support beams, the bolts holding the beams together quickly melted.

Because of the WTCs unique box design, the floors collapsing on eachother remained within the metal cage that outlined the building.

[RC]

5. And the bolts were made of... What?

The same material as the beams?

This makes as much sense as 9000 gallons of jet fuel flowing down the elevator shafts to the 7th sub basement and burning so hot in that airless environment that it melted enough of those massive supports to collapse the building.

Sure... got any others?

[greyl]

6. Steel alloy. So?

Steel commonly melts at about 2500 degrees, but weakens at much lower temps. The slow burning fire in the WTC burned at about 2000 degrees. Add the heat to the structural damage which put added loads on key members and...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2907_wtc.html

http://www.geocities.com/mbehar.geo/WTC-one-opinion-Congr.html

[Frodo]

12. Where did that story come from ?

What's the story? They didn't collapse from the bottom. The lower half of each tower was completely intact as the upper portion collapsed.

[Oberst Klink]

4. I think I know how the buildings actually went down:

2 planes crashed into them.

[el_gato]

7. wrong building pay closer attention next time

they are talking about wtc7

[RH]

8. No. They were talking about

"...the WTC, which I believe was a controlled demolition, most likely controlled from WTC #7

[gandalf]

9. Some help

I would like to make two comments:
1) Up to now there is no definite and completely satisfying explanation for the collapse.
"In response to the WTC tragedy, the National Institute of Standards and Technology is conducting a three-part plan: a 24-month building and fire safety investigation to study the factors contributing to the probable cause (or causes) of post-impact collapse of the WTC Towers (WTC 1 and 2) and WTC 7”.
The FEMA pancaking hypothesis seems plausible to some people, but it is exactly that: a hypothesis that still has to be confirmed.
2) Referring to point 3.
I don't buy the logic of the conspirators. If they've already got
airliners smashing into buildings, why would they think they need the
additional issue of buildings collapsing in order to get their terror
message across? Do these theorists really believe that the collapse
of these buildings was necessary for Bush to trample on our civil
rights, etc.?
The complete event of 9/11 is of a highly symbolic nature. It is no coincidence that it is so often compared to Pear Harbor, and that a catalyzing event like Pear Harbor is wanted by PNAC. The endlessly repeated collapsing of the symbols of American Economic Power on TV had, I think, an enormous psychological effect not only on American, but also on European people.
If the towers had withstood the attacking planes, the effect would have been: Look, our enemies attack us even with flying bombs, but we prevail. Unfortunately we had some victims, but in the end the fires could be extinguished, the symbols of American power stand still erect. A few weeks later nothing could have been seen of the attacks.
But now the unique skyline of NY is changed forever.

[Frodo]

11. If you think "a few weeks later"...

"nothing would have been seen of the attacks"...

You didn't see the same thing the rest of the world saw. It would have taken years to repair the damage and months before ANY of the building would have been usable, possibly years.

I suspect the upper floors would have needed to be demolished prior to any repair.

This would not have been a "spackle" job, and you don't plug in new supports 80 stories up.

[CaptainMidnight]

10. okay

so I'm mostly getting responses from other debunkers.

I don't take this shit lightly. I didn't wanna believe it. Can I PROOOOOOOOVE it? NO.

And there's other more slam-dunk evidence of government complicity, for sure. I for one, don't think there's anything to that "missile hit the Pentagon" theory. I've examined whatever evidence is out there, looked at all the pix, etc. It certainly looks fishy, but ultimately, I think the main proponents of that theory are disinformationists trying to distract us from the real damning truth, and to discredit us by having us put forth their truly crackpot theories.

But I have spent TONS of time on the WTC, and am convinced it was a controlled demolition.

Hope to get some more input...

Captain Mike

[Abe Linkman]

13. Pentagon? I'm a BIT of a bullthrower myself, but go on w/your story.

"I for one, don't think there's anything to that "missile hit the Pentagon" theory. I've examined whatever evidence is out there, looked at all the pix, etc. It certainly looks fishy, but ultimately, I think the main proponents of that theory are disinformationists trying to distract us from the real damning truth, and to discredit us by having us put forth their truly crackpot theories."

So what exactly is YOUR theory about the Pentagon? Go ahead, take all the space you need. Did Barbara Olson call you, too?

[CaptainMidnight]

15. whoah

I dont' wanna distract from my WTC subject.

I don't HAVE a theory about the Pentagon. No need for Babs Olson snarky remarks. I do think her cellphone call is bunk. Or rather, Ted Olson telling us that she called him. Actually, if you look at the timing, the first public news we had that there were "Arab Hijackers" onboard those planes came from Ted Olson.

I'm amazed more people aren't suspicious of the fact that one of the biggest pieces of "evidence" foisted upon the public, which reinforced the Big Lie, came from George W. Bush's LAWYER.

Pentagon. Yeah, it's a pretty small hole, but then again, those planes are made of fragile stuff, the wings are filled with fuel, they would just disintigrate. Look, I"m no scientist, it's just what I've read. Plus, two ACTUAL planes hitting the WTC (whether they were the SAME planes that took off or not) was good enough to carry out the scheme. Why not Flight 77 just plain crashing into the Pentagon as planned? It's simply the EASIEST way to carry it off, regardless of WHO or WHAT was piloting that plane.

A missile? Why bother? Again, the hole looks really friggin' small.

Plus, one of the most respected "conspiracy theorists" out there in any realm of investigation is John Judge. I follow his stuff quite voraciously. He doesn't buy the missile CT either. Plus, someone he knew was on #77, and they found her arm with a certain bracelet on it that was given to her as a gift. Something like that. If the Pentagon crash wasn't Jake, you can be that Judge would have been all over it.

Now, any more WTC expertise would be very helpful.

Thanx
Captain Mike

[DulceDecorum]

16. Tell me more about the arm

and how come he is so sure
a) that it is hers, and
b) that it was disconnected by that particular crash into the Pentagon.

In 1984, the Reagan administration insisted that it had no knowledge about any casualties from secret fighting in Central America. But the Knight-Ridder story ended with a chilling quote from a former covert military specialist who explained the practice of "bodywashing."
"If a guy is killed on a mission," the former officer said, "and if it was sensitive politically, we'd ship the body back home and have a jeep roll over on him at Fort Huachuca," a remote Army intelligence base in Arizona. "Or we'd arrange a chopper crash, or wait until one happened and insert a body or two into the wreckage later. It's not that difficult."
http://www.oz.net/~vvawai/sw/sw33/pgs_10-19/el-salvador.html

Someone somewhere claiming they saw a bracelet is just so much Sturm und Drang signifying nothing.
And we have already demonstrated elsewhere on this forum, that the so-called burn victims are either lying through their teeth or else they are simply not made of human flesh and blood.
We have seen pictures of the Penta-lawn and there is very very little in the way of debris and no body parts anywhere at all. Besides which, everyone in the Penta-crowd is clean and neat and soot-free. Even the one being loaded into the ambulance.
We have scrutinized pictures of the Penta-floor which was flooded by the sprinklers and the firemen, and there is not the faintest tinge of red in all that water nor are there any body parts anywhere to be seen.
From the very beginning, attention has been focused AWAY from the Pentagon which displayes a Penta-multitude of Pentanomalies.
For example, the Pentautopsy of the Penta-passenger AFTER that incredible Pentafire and the Pentabracelet which failed to melt, or even lose it's shape, after withstanding a force and a fire which were sufficient to completely ruin the black boxes of the plane.

Both black boxes from the hijacked aircraft which crashed into the Pentagon have also been recovered and turned over to the Federal Aviation Administration.
However, according to a report in the Washington Times, investigators have so far failed to extract information from the Pentagon attack voice recorder because it was so badly damaged.
<snip>
The recorders are housed in immensely strong materials, such as titanium, and insulated to withstand a crash impact many times the force of gravity and temperatures of more than 1,000 degrees Celsius.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1543564.stm

That graceful and bejewelled Penta-arm might just be the long-lost soul-mate of El brazo de Onofre which was taken from Onofre Martinez by 1,000 butterflies shortly before the start of the Milagro Beanfield War. Should these two decide to unite in holy matrimony, the ceremony will be performed by Thing.

[demodewd]

17. Clap,clap

I have to hand it to you..Dulce..you are very entertaining. And convincing.

[RH]

18. Crap, crap.

Feb. 25, 2002 --FBI Director Robert Mueller said Flight 77's data recorder provided altitude, speed, headings and other information, but the voice recorder contained nothing useful.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/02/25/attack/main501989.shtml

[demodewd]

20. re: crap crap

I would expect nothing less from Herr Mueller.

[DulceDecorum]

24. Crap trap

We talking about the arm.
The Penta-arm which defied incredible forces and the penta-bracelet which refused to leave the Penta-arm.
This duo managed to stay together despite the fact that the airliner upon which they were supposedly travelling suffered such trauma that its black boxes were supposedly renedered useless to investigation.

If the cockpit voice data recorder was unrecoverable,
it would be THE FIRST TIME in aviation history
a solid-state data recorder
(the type used on Flight 77)
was unrecoverable after a crash.
http://www.911review.org/Wiki/Flight77BlackBoxes.shtml

Most people
(including the scientists at the National Transportation Safety Board)
think that the black boxes are tough cookies.

The storage medium of each recorder is located in a protective capsule, which must be able to withstand an impact of 3,400gs (3,400 times the force of gravity). Additionally, each must also survive flames at 2,000°F for up to 30 minutes, and submersion in 20,000 feet of saltwater for 30 days. Typically, to increase their chances of survival, the recorders are located in the tail section of the aircraft, which usually sustains the least impact in a crash.
http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/march00/features/alone/alone.html

Strong? WRONG!!
An air stewardess' arm
and her bracelet
are tougher and much more durable that THAT.
Ask John Judge.

Second, I was convinced I had lost a dear friend and fellow assassination researcher that day, who was a regular flight attendant on Flight 77 from Dulles to LAX. Thankfully, she was home with her ailing father and was not killed. She was taken with other ground crew and attendants who worked that route to see the damage at the Pentagon, and she recognized parts of the plane she had flown so often.
There was rubble and remains despite your claims. She was shown autopsy photos of her fellow crew members, including the severed arm of her best friend at work, which she recognized from the bracelet she wore.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/notAllCequal.html

On the other hand......
She WAS taken to see the damage and
she WAS shown autopsy photos of her fellow crew members,
including the severed arm of her best friend at work.
http://condor.stcloudstate.edu/~physcrse/astr106/oath.html
And her account does not differ from the offical story.
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=588&art_id=iol1061715073605G446&set_id=1

[RH]

28. black boxes were

useful to investigation.

Flight 77's data recorder provided altitude, speed, headings and other information.

First you complained that no body parts were to be seen. Now you're complaining that a body part was to be seen. Who do you think you're going to impress with that sort of inconsistent disingenuity?

The cockpit voice recorder was recovered. It was discovered early on Friday September 14th.

Previous experience would not then be so relevant to whether or not it would then have contained anything useful, just as any lack of previous experience of a transponder being out of action would not be so relevant. The circumstance was extraordinary. Microphones may have been interfered with. We simply do not know.

[DulceDecorum]

14. Compare and contrast

the Pentagon and the WTC.
And go look at the standards to which either one was supposedly built.
The Pentagon should have collapsed and the WTC should have remained standing or at least not have turned to powder from the top down.

We have spent countless hours trying to understand just how we were hoaxed on September 11, 2001 and hoaxed we were. It is rather like unraveling a trick done by a magician - by which I mean a regular ordinary prestidigitator who performs his maneuvers by sleight of hand.

The planes provided the distraction.
Meanwhile, thousands of wire transfers moved money globally and $25 billion was physically loaded on jets never to be seen again.

And here we sit,
still mesmerized and mouthing minutiae,
debating aeronautic and explosive details,
sifting semantics and "strategery"
while our lives are turning to dust.
But enough of reality,
how many angels can sit on the point of a pin?

[RH]

19. huh?

The Pentagon should have collapsed and the WTC should have remained standing or at least not have turned to powder from the top down.

becuase that part of the Pentagon had been especially braced with steel columns and two inch thick windows to resist attack?

[DulceDecorum]

23. Windows left, right?

RH, old boy,
what do you mean -
"that part of the Pentagon had been especially braced with steel columns and two inch thick windows to resist attack? "

Let us carefully examine the scene of the crime.



http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/news/news_stories/pent-wppost.html



Observe the damage area.



According to this,
Wedge One is to the right of the helipad.
http://renovation.pentagon.mil/image-Locator-W1-full.htm

The plane crashed into two Wedges.


RAY SUAREZ: When Evey got to the crash site, he found the plane had crashed diagonally through a part of both the new renovation and the old building. Fire fed by 10,000 gallons of jet fuel was just beginning to spread.
Eventually it would damage two million square feet, almost a third of the building.
<snip>
RAY SUAREZ: The original Pentagon structure is actually five different structures, or wedges; each one a separate entity connected by expansion joints. Five concentric rings of offices connect the wedges. The plane plowed through three rings just to the right of an expansion joint, almost like the first cut in a wedding cake.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june02/rebuilding_1-16.html

The heat of the fire was so intense that it damaged the concrete, and it damaged it further than we had initially thought that it had. In some areas, the fire was intense enough that the windows had actually melted.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june02/rebuilding_1-16.html

But yet and still,
despite the photographic evidence to the contrary,
THIS is what we are told over and over and over again.

LEE EVEY: That fire went nowhere in wedge one. (Right side) Now I did get a heck of a lot of water damage in wedge one, as a result of that, but the fire went nowhere.
Wedge two, (left side) the fire just took off.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june02/rebuilding_1-16.html




Let's look at the scene once again.
Carefully identify the area of impact and the area of collapse.
Look carefully to see which Wedge remained standing and which one collapsed.


http://www.dupont.com/safetyglass/lgn/stories/2111.html


ALAN KILSHEIMER: If you looked at the photographs early on, you saw a vertical clean line. That was the expansion joint. So, everything to the left didn't collapse and everything to the right collapsed within an hour or two.
RAY SUAREZ: On that LEFT SIDE WAS WEDGE TWO, part of the unrenovated original Pentagon with no sprinkler system and tons of asbestos. On the RIGHT SIDE WAS THE NEWLY RENOVATED WEDGE ONE with a brand new advanced sprinkler system.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june02/rebuilding_1-16.html



Thus we see that it is
the OLD windows in Wedge TWO that held up.



You can see for yourself what happened to the new ones.
And the new Wedge.
And the newfangled construction.
And don't forget:
RAY SUAREZ: When Evey got to the crash site,
he found
THE PLANE HAD CRASHED DIAGONALLY THROUGH A PART OF
BOTH THE NEW RENOVATION AND THE OLD BUILDING.
Fire fed by 10,000 gallons of jet fuel was just beginning to spread.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june02/rebuilding_1-16.html

[RH]

25. You are wrong.

See for instance page 7 of this report:

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/010915-D-6570C-001.pdf

The windows at the end of your arrow were a part of wedge 1, thus blast resistant.

Wedge two begins half way along that face of the building, at the doorway behind the heliport, not at the expansion joint.

[aeon flux]

21. #5

"5. Why bother with the airliners at all? Why not just blow up the
buildings and say it was Al Qaeda? "

That Arabs were somehow able to bypass all the security and rig the WTC with explosives that bring down both towers? Not only bring them down, but have them go down in a very expert, controlled manner?

Who would believe this?

(using airplanes to crash into the buildings is a much more plausible story.)

[CaptainMidnight]

22. no one

is saying al qaeda or terrorists did a controlled demolition. I'm saying that Bush & Co., PNAC, Black Ops, whomever representing AMERICAN interests in whatever small and selfish way were the ones who rigged the building for a controlled demolition.

IT's amazing how people will believe NO PLANE hit the Pentagon, yet they think a controlled demolition of the WTC is farfetched and unbelievable.

Unbelievable!

Cutting thru your purple prose, separating the wheat from the chaff, I gather you don't buy the arm with the bracelet thingie. I got this from Judge. Again, he's one of the most respected, followed, and credible "conspiracy theorists" out there. Nothing gets by him. He's come up with some amazing stuff that I can only guess as true. I mean, this guy's one or two clicks away from Skolnick in some senses, so my feeling is, if there WAS anything fishy, Judge would be the one to come up with an even more elaborate, detailed, and fantastical take on "what really" hit the Pentagon.

He considers the Pentagon to be no mystery. I trust his judgement.

I can find the quote somewhere. Or listen to an MP3 of his interviews at www.radio4all.net. Or his site at Ratical.org.

Captain Mike

[Abe Linkman]

27. If it's no myster to "Judge", then what is it to "Judge"?

"He considers the Pentagon to be no mystery. I trust his judgement."

And his judgment is that____________? What?

[RH]

30. A B757 hit the Pentagon.

[RH]

29. Who would believe this?

How soon you forget.

The possibility was believed in 1993!

[CaptainMidnight]

26. please stay on topic

here.

WTC demolition, yes or no?

Plenty of threads for Pentagon theories, children.

CM

[DulceDecorum]

31. Watch the birdie

Whatever brought down the WTC AND damaged the Pentagon
(children)
was NOT a plane.

(RH,
I will see you later on a Pentagon thread.
Let the good Captain have some WTC bashing.)