Structural integrity is a reality. A 60lb. person can stand on an empty pop can, hit its side with a ruler and get an instant collapse. Burn out 9 stories of a building, have the 20 to 30 ones above fall onto the bottom ones the same thing.
I was in a Muslim country when this happened, many there were pleased. In many Mosques they end each pray service with the slogan 'down (death to) with America'. If 30 churches in America ended with a similar statement against Muslims we would do all hear about it. Are the Muslims who disagree with their brethren talking out to stop this type of blatant racism in their holy sanctuaries? If not then what are they really doing?
| Print this article |
9/11 Twin Towers Collapse: Independent Media Research Brings Back A Different Story - Video Clips
Sponsored Links
As people reject the spin-heavy, information-lite mass media and turn to networked, participatory media emerging through blogs, podcasting and video sharing services like YouTube, truth becomes no longer the property of the few. It is being negotiated by active, engaged participants in the new media landscape through an active, well documented and highly dynamic public discussion.
The events of September 11, 2001 are embedded in the collective unconscious. Emotive images of the World Trade Center towers collapsing, of the jet plane collisions, of people leaping to their deaths, have received so much airplay in the international media as to define the tone of the decade - a decade that ushered in a permanent and nebulous war, indefinite incarcerations and the justification of illegal torture.
But the official line taken by the global mass media has not gone unquestioned by an increasingly less trusting, increasingly more resourceful public. Powered by internet discussion groups, citizen journalism and the informal networks of video sharing that have sprung up around YouTube and Google Video, questions have been raised as to just who was behind the tragic events of 9/11.
Seismic record at Palisaded - NY - 34KM north of the WTC disaster - what are the huge seismic spikes happening just before the two collapses? - Give an answer if you can
Seismographs at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., 21 miles north of the WTC, recorded strange seismic activity on Sept. 11 that has still not been explained.
While the aircraft crashes caused minimal earth shaking, significant earthquakes with unusual spikes occurred at the beginning of each collapse. The Palisades seismic data recorded a 2.1 magnitude earthquake during the 10-second collapse of the South Tower at 9:59:04 and a 2.3 quake during the 8-second collapse of the North Tower at 10:28:31. However, the Palisades seismic record shows that-as the collapses began-a huge seismic "spike" marked the moment the greatest energy went into the ground. The strongest jolts were all registered at the beginning of the collapses, well before the falling debris struck the Earth.
However you feel about the theory, which presents a compelling alternative to the official line pedaled by global media conglomerates the people have lost faith in, what truly shines through the development and sharing of this theory is the power of a grassroots media made by the people, for the people.
In this video selection of some of the more interesting videos emerging from the internet based democratic, participatory media a different point of view emerges as to just what happened. This point of view has been labeled The Controlled Demolition Theory.
While the mass media have, by and large, been keen to brush these challenges to the Al Qaeda terror plot aside as "conspiracy theory", few note that the very official version is a "conspiracy theory" itself, albeit guided by different and blatantly less capable forces.
But as an increasing number of distinguished academics and researchers has started to analyze, comment and report in mode detail, the superficial appearance of what really happened to the twin towers takes on a completely different profile: it was not possible for commercial airliners to bring the twin towers to a free-fall, pan-caking collapse as the one we have all memorized. Preceding incidents of the same kind do show that such steel structures may indeed burn like hell, but they do never collapse because of it.
And if you dig just a little bit more into making sense of the collapse speed, the debris large like a small house flying to buildings across the street, the "nothingness" with which were left with (that is no human bodies, relics or other phyisical materials larger than a square inch), and the number of explosions recorded and seen by many of the live witnesses, some other frightnening possibility starts to make its way into this: The World Trade Center buildings were made to collapse on command, with the best tools and typical approach of a perfect controlled demolition.
But what scientific weight is there to this contention?
Who are the people challenging the official line?
What would the implications be?
What Is The Controlled Demolition Theory?
Among the scholars adding credence to the idea that the WTC buildings were brought down by powerful explosive charges in a controlled demolition is Professor David Ray Griffin. In the following video extract, taken from a longer BBC interview, Professor Griffin explains the theory.
In simple terms, then, the Controlled Demolition Theory is founded on the principle that the way the World Trade Center towers fell, and the nature of the explosions that took place within them could only have been possible through the use of carefully planned, expertly executed controlled demolition.
The problem is fundamentally one of physics.
In the next video, from the 9/11 documentary Improbable Collapse, Professor Griffin's doubts about the official line are supported by Professor Steven E. Jones of BYU's Department of Physics.
Professor Jones discusses the scientific improbability of one of the buildings collapsing due to fire, further compounded by the improbability of three buildings doing the same, on the same day, further yet compounded by the way that all three collapsed symmetrically, as opposed to toppling over. This equates to something in the region of 64,000,000 to 1 chance.
The Role of Thermite In The Controlled Demolition Theory
Improbability aside, one of biggest mysteries surrounding the World Trade Center building explosions is that of the eight weeks of fires that followed, and the molten metal in evidence at all three of the sites.
Scientifically, it is impossible that the 9/11 fires could have burned at a sufficiently high temperature to melt steel , and yet molten steel was much in evidence. As Professor Jones explains in 9/11 Truth: Thermite & The Case For Controlled Demolition, this is direct evidence for the use of an explosive such as Thermite.
Perhaps the most interesting case is that of Building 7, which did not have an airplane flown into it, but nevertheless collapsed in the same fashion as the other two buildings. In the following video, the Demolition Theory case examined so far is applied to the specific case of Building 7, perhaps the most inexplicable of the three collapsed towers.
The Implications
The implications that controlled demolition was involved in the 9/11 tragedy are as immense as they are obvious.
At a fundamental level, the US government would have to have been directly involved in both the deliberate murdering of innocent people, and the deliberate deception of millions via the media for their own economic and militaristic ends.
Read More Elsewhere
If you are interested in reading more about the Controlled Demolition Theory, from both sides of the debate, you might like to check out the following websites:
- deconsumption - An interesting piece detailing the recent 9/11 Mysteries - Demolitions documentary and the ideas behind it
- Wikipedia's lengthy entry on 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
- Representative Press' counter-arguement 'WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory'
- LewRockwell.Com's 'Why Did The Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse?"
- Debunking 911's 'Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories And Controlled Demolition Myths
Readers' Comments
| 2009-02-15 10:52:08 |
| 2008-08-03 00:39:39 |
good site
the only comment in the main body i would be less general with is that "the U.S gov't had to be directly involved in the murdering of innocent people".
certain fractions would have been in the Know (like Cheney) , including obviously some intelligence agency employees, as well most likely spanning the atlantic.
The scariest thing for most people to contemplate is that there are greedy power hungry sociopaths in positions of high influence through out the world and in our very own country
| 2008-01-26 20:33:39 |
but why did he do that?
| 2008-01-05 22:56:42 |
Funny... several times I've seen people post the concept that "planting explosives takes time" as if this were somehow a valid argumentative route towards debunking the idea that in fact the twin towers were brought down by explosives.
Yes, it took time, and was conducted probably by people wearing elevator service uniforms and other "maintenance" looking people virtually invisible to anyone else.
And, for all you know, the building was created with the explosives in place. The 1970s were not a stupid period in US history. Besides possibly nefarious reasons, some good reasons for packing explosives in place would be quick demolition if need be. Whatever.
How stupid can you be?
| 2007-12-22 23:40:32 |
Let's see. Preparing a building for a controlled demolition takes time; in the case of two towers as large as the World Trade Center, a lot of time. When exactly did this preparation take place? And NO ONE saw it taking place? None of the survivors have come forward? This theory put forth by some Americans has the terrorists laughing and wondering how stupid some of our citizens are. Unbelievable.
| 2007-10-14 23:54:07 |
Obviously, the U.S. govt would never tell the truth about its hidden agendas, but this truly is something that if wise enough about the situation we can research it and find out that steel building DO NOT collapse in an hour just by a jet hitting it and jet fuel burning, it was controlled obviously, I am just waiting for someone in the mainstream media to say something, or a political figure, that way the american public will become aware. Sadly, not many americans research anything that is not of importance to them, like Paris Hilton.
| 2006-12-31 19:19:46 |
U guys are fuc...ng insane to make up such a lame ass story!! how do u guys come up with this shit?! seriously....
| 2006-12-30 07:29:16 |
Oh dear. It appears there is a simpler explanation than these fascinating conspiracies. Unfortunately it may be a bit complex for simple minds.
The "Deep Mystery" of Melted Steel
There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction--occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining steel samples under optical and scanning electron microscopes. A preliminary report was published in JOM, the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. A more detailed analysis comprises Appendix C of the FEMA report. The New York Times called these findings "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." The significance of the work on a sample from Building 7 and a structural column from one of the twin towers becomes apparent only when one sees these heavy chunks of damaged metal.
A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.
A eutectic compound is a mixture of two or more substances that melts at the lowest temperature of any mixture of its components. Blacksmiths took advantage of this property by welding over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron. In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity.
"The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary- as acid rain."
Have environmental pollutants increased the potential for eutectic reactions? "We may have just the inherent conditions in the atmosphere so that a lot of water on a burning building will form sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide or hydroxides, and start the eutectic process as the steel heats up," Biederman says. He notes that the sulfur could also have come from contents of the burning buildings, such as rubber or plastics. Another possible culprit is ocean salts, such as sodium sulfate, which is known to catalyze sulfidation reactions on turbine blades of jet engines. "All of these things have to be explored," he says.
From a building-safety point of view, the critical question is: Did the eutectic mixture form before the buildings collapsed, or later, as the remains smoldered on the ground. "We have no idea," admits Sisson. "To answer that, we would need to recreate those fires in the FPE labs, and burn fresh steel of known composition for the right time period, with the right environment." He hopes to have the opportunity to collaborate on thermodynamically controlled studies, and to observe the effects of adding sulfur, copper and other elements. The most important lesson, Sisson and Biederman stress, is that fail-safe sprinkler systems are essential to prevent steel from reaching even 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, because phase changes at the 1,300-degree mark compromise a structure's load-bearing capacity.
The FEMA report calls for further metallurgic investigations, and Barnett, Biederman and Sisson hope that WPI will obtain NIST funding and access to more samples. They are continuing their microscopic studies on the samples prepared by graduate student Jeremy Bernier and Marco Fontecchio, the 2001–02 Helen E. Stoddard Materials Science and Engineering Fellow. (Next year's Stoddard Fellow, Erin Sullivan, will take up this work as part of her graduate studies.) Publication of their results may clear up some mysteries that have confounded the scientific community
From
http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html
| 2006-11-09 13:32:45 |
What a bunch of crap! I'm ashamed to even have read it.
| 2006-11-07 05:06:02 |
Its something that we have known all along. A bunch of extremist muslims hijacking planes and smashing into the world trade centre is the craziest conspiracy theory so far! We all know it was the doing of a deranged and evil US government. I cannot judge these dispicable acts but all those concerned will ultimately be brought before the lord and judged severely.
| 2006-11-01 18:50:36 |
As an individual with only a recent interest in the subject brought about by web reports, the vital aspect here is to ensure that all future research is scientific and properly peer reviewed.
This means that the whole arena is not swamped by the lunatic fringe but that the key unanswered components remain the central focus. eg WTC7
| 2006-10-22 15:45:27 |
Thanks for being courageous enough to run this story...printing the truth.
BRAVO!
Joe
| 2006-10-22 13:31:36 |
Thank you for putting so many good videos along with the basic outline for the controlled demo theory. Now I have a site I can show people this side of the debate clearly, with good vid clips to illistrate visuallly why a new 911 investagation is needed.
| 2006-10-22 09:27:34 |
Well to say that my view of the world has just been shattered does not even begin to express it. Now that I know this and I do think that this is true, I can't stop but to try to make others aware also. My life will forever be different.
I am still in shock.
| Print this article |
