The Pentagon on 9/11 - MODERATOR WARNING ISSUED

yasureoktoo · Oct 3, 2018

Poor Bobbie.
Why would you need temperatures high enough to melt steel.
Just putting that in, indicates BS.

Gamolon · Oct 3, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

But thanks for bringing that up, it's exactly what I use people like yourself for, to post how and why the OCT is a massive lie and a fraud.
Click to expand...

Keep pushing your agenda Bobby. We all know you "respect" those who base their beliefs in lies and wrong information. We all know that doesn;t matter to you as long as they all agree the "OCT" is a lie.

Shinebox · Oct 3, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

It's not a "brag", it's a fact and it is extremely important, not to you of course, but that means nothing to me.

What you're telling me is your desperate attempt to change the point I made which you didn't and you haven't moved me one millimeter if that's your objective. I don't care what else you think these people believe or what you believe Gamo. It's not relevant to me.

That the OCT is a lie stands on its merit (the facts, the history, the improbability/impossibility, etc.). But thanks for bringing that up, it's exactly what I use people like yourself for, to post how and why the OCT is a massive lie and a fraud. The OCT for the most part is comprised of the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST reports, as well as Bush administration claims (many of which have been proven LIES). So here are the facts, not one of these is theory.

The 9/11 Commission Report is a massive lie because of the following (note these are just some of the major highlights, there's much more):

1. The Bush administration is directly responsible for the wholesale destruction of 9/11 evidence, in violation of federal and local law, thus hampering/corrupting any investigation.
2. The Bush administration did not want to investigate 9/11, in fact they (or more specifically Cheney) asked Sen. Tom Daschle not to investigate 9/11 on several occasions.
3. The Bush administration reluctantly yielded to investigating 9/11 due to pressure from the 9/11 families, specifically the Jersey Girls but wanted the investigation to only focus on intelligence failures.
4. The Bush administration appointed Henry Kissinger as the chairman of the 9/11 Commission who was subsequently forced to resign due to conflicts of interest.
5. The Bush administration stocked the 9/11 Commission with cronies, especially Philip Zelikow.
6. All members of the 9/11 Commission had conflicts of interest and were covering for someone.
7. The 9/11 Commission cut a deal with the Bush administration essentially allowing them to dictate who on the 9/11 Commission could see what evidence and also limited the evidence the 9/11 Commission had access to.
8. According to the 9/11 Commission, there are 570 cubic feet of textual records, a large percentage of it classified, presumably inaccessible to the 9/11 Commission itself (see #7).
9. Sen. Max Cleland resigned as a result of #7, labeling the 9/11 investigation a scam and obstruction.
10. The 9/11 families or more specifically the Family Steering Committee sent over 400 questions to the 9/11 Commission and the vast majority of the questions were either unanswered or insufficiently answered.
11. Philip Zelikow created an outline of the 9/11 Commission Report prior to the first meeting of the 9/11 Commission.
12. Philip Zelikow admitted that most if not all of the 9/11 Commission Report relied on 3rd party relayed torture testimony.
13. The source of over 25% of the Commission Report's footnotes is 3rd party relayed torture testimony.
14. The 9/11 Commission were lied to by the CIA who told them they gave them everything they asked for but withheld torture tapes which they never revealed their existence to the 9/11 Commission.
15. The torture tapes were deliberately destroyed by the CIA despite a federal court order to preserve them.
16. The Senate Intelligence Committee on Torture report claims that the CIA's torture methods yielded NO USEFUL INTELLIGENCE (see #12 and #13).
17. The FBI lied to the 9/11 Commission (and Congress) when they told them they gave them everything. They were discovered a decade later to be holding over 80,000 pages of documents from their PENTBBOM "investigation" that they never revealed existed.
18. NORAD and other key Pentagon officials told the 9/11 Commission different stories that were in conflict with each other or outright lies.
19. The 9/11 Commission agreed to interview Bush and Cheney together unsworn and unrecorded.
20. There is no evidence that the 9/11 Commission conducted any criminal/scientific/forensic investigation in accordance with universally accepted standards appropriate for such an investigation. Especially within the vast scope required by a major historical event such as 9/11. Much of the contents of the 9/11 Commission Report is unvetted and/or unsupported by legitimate evidence (any evidence obtained via the use of torture is illegitimate/unreliable - see #16).
21. The 9/11 Commission claimed in their report that "their aim has not been to assign individual blame", thus making a mockery of the "investigation".
22. Eyewitnesses who were to testify to the 9/11 Commission were coached by Soviet style government "minders" prior to their testimonies, thus tampering with, biasing and corrupting the "investigation".
23. Many potential crucial eyewitnesses were never interviewed by the 9/11 Commission. Potential whistleblowers were not granted immunity and therefore many did not testify as a result.
24. Some key eyewitness testimonies were excluded from the 9/11 Commission Report.
25. The 9/11 Commission failed to investigate key events and issues, such as the destruction of WTC7 (unmentioned) and the financing of 9/11, deeming it of "little practical significance" (in direct contradiction to all criminal investigation standards).
26. The 9/11 Commission co-chairs admitted they were set up to fail, starved of funds, denied access to the truth, misled by senior officials in the Pentagon and the FAA, did not examine key evidence, claimed the report was incomplete and flawed and that many questions remain unanswered.
27. Philip Zelikow had complete control over the final edit of the 9/11 Commission Report and was responsible for keeping the classified 28 pages from the 9/11 Commission. Zelikow fired an aide who wanted to bring the 28 pages to the attention of the 9/11 Commission.
28. The published version of the 9/11 Commission Report in general is similar to the official 9/11 conspiracy theory disseminated as fact by the Bush administration prior to the establishment of the 9/11 Commission.
29. The 9/11 Commission Report was severely criticized by many, especially the Jersey Girls, who were responsible for pressuring the Bush administration for an investigation. "we knew it was a farce, we wanted their words, their lies down on paper" - Patty Casazza.

Further details can be found at: http://www.politicalforum.com/index...mission-scam-exposed-in-all-its-glory.495859/

The NIST reports are a massive lie because of the following (note these are just some of the major highlights, there's much more):

Summary of problems with the NIST WTC Tower Report

1. The claim that the upper part of the towers crushed the lower part of the towers violates the laws of conservation of momentum and the law that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. As shown by the measured smooth uninterrupted descent of the upper portion of the North Tower.

2. NIST claims that the floor trusses in the aircraft impact zone push outward on the perimeter columns with a force of about 80 KIPS before starting to sag and pull the columns inward to cause the building to collapse. Yet there is no evidence to support this claim. Extensive photos and videos of the towers show no outward bowing of the perimeter columns at any time during the fires before the collapse.

3. NIST imposed unrealistic artificial 5 KIP forces on each floor truss to column connection over the 5 stories of the damage zone on the south face of the North Tower in order to make their collapse initiation model work. This amounts to a lateral force of about 750 KIPS applied artificially to that face of the building which cannot be justified by any rationale.

4. NIST does not investigate or explain the global collapse which occurred after the collapse initiation was supposedly initiated by the column failures in the impact zone. NIST simply states, “global collapse ensued”.

5. The NIST collapse sequence is initiated by the failure of the floor trusses in the impact zone and subsequent pulling in of the perimeter column. But the sequence ignores the fact that the core columns failed first, as evidenced by the video of the North Tower collapse showing that the antenna and hat truss resting on the core column began their descent well before the outer perimeter of the building began to fall. This fact invalidates the NIST collapse initiation theory.

6. The NIST report fails to provide any information suggesting that the load capacity of the core and perimeter columns was exceeded at any time during the collapse sequence. NIST ignored the fact that the factor of safety of 3 in the core columns and 5 in the perimeter columns would have prevented the failure mechanism that is theorized in their collapse initiation model.

7. The NIST global collapse theory depends upon the ASCE-published progressive collapse theory by Zdenek Bazant. His theory has been shown to have erroneous input data rendering it non-viable as an explanation for the observed behavior of the vertical propagation. ASCE refuses to acknowledge the errors in the input data of Bazant’s theory.

All assumptions below, which were used in the NIST WTC7 report, have been shown to be erroneous, and correction of these assumptions invalidate the report's conclusions.

1. A girder bearing seat width of 12 inches not 11 inches at column 79 would prevent girder walk off.

2. The omitted stiffeners on girder A2001 at column 79 would have prevented the flange from folding and eliminated any chance of walk off.

3. The thermally expanded girder A2001 could not move past the column 79 side plate.

4. There were shear studs on girder A2001 and this would cause the beams to buckle before pushing the girder off its seat.

5. All west and south girder connections to column 79 were not broken down to the 6th floor.

6. A northeast corner floor failure could not cascade down eight floors so there is not enough energy to break through the girder connection on the next floor down.

7. There were lateral support beams framing G3005 and they would have prevented it from buckling.

8. Beam and girder notching to simulate their buckling due to the fire in the model is not consistent with the time phased weakening fire would produce.

9. Evidence of temperatures high enough to melt steel as documented by FEMA was ignored.

10. The NIST model shows radical deformation of the upper exterior as the east side interior collapses but this is not observed in actual footage of the video collapse.

11. A simultaneous free fall of all four corners of the roofline does have implications.

Deficiency Categories in the NIST WTC Reports and ASCE published Theories

First – Defective collapse initiation theories in the NIST twin tower and WTC7 reports

Second – Unjustified assumptions and errors in the NIST twin tower and WTC7 reports

Third – Omissions and alterations of construction details in the NIST WTC7 report

Fourth – Errors in the calculations of the ASCE published theories

Fifth – Internal contradictions in the NIST WTC7 report

Sixth – NIST ignores FEMA evidence of high temperature exposure of structural steel from WTC7

Seventh – NIST and the ASCE refuse to respond to peer criticism

Further details can be found at: http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-nist-9-11-scam-exposed-in-all-its-glory.458597/

These are some of the reasons why the official 9/11 narrative falls on its face on its own merit. And these are just some of the reasons why there are 3,045 architect and engineer signatories (as of today and GROWING) to a petition demanding a "new" investigation into 9/11. Perhaps some of them have their own personal theories about 9/11, perhaps not. But obviously when the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) is based on proven lies, many will ascribe to all sorts of other theories.

The rest of your post is irrelevant, has already been addressed, is not worth addressing and I don't care one iota about your pretenses. The above (and much more) is ALL I really care about. You can attack and ridicule me all you want, call it "WRONG INFORMATION" if YOU believe it is, it's not important to me. What's important is that 9/11 has never been legitimately investigated and the official 9/11 narrative (OCT) that you grovel to and defend 24/7 is proven criminal fraud.
Click to expand...

copy pasta ... I already exposed your context problems regarding these supposed facts ... care to go back to #1 again? ...

Bob0627 · Oct 3, 2018

Shinebox said: ↑

copy pasta
Click to expand...

Yes thanks, please do so every chance you get.

I already exposed your context problems regarding these supposed facts ... care to go back to #1 again? ...
Click to expand...

Please do, all 29 and the many NIST problems, if you think it helps you somehow. The "context" is plain and simple, the OCT is a massive criminal fraud.

Gamolon · Oct 3, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

9. Evidence of temperatures high enough to melt steel as documented by FEMA was ignored.
Click to expand...

Bobby, care to link to the "documented" temperatures hot enough to melt steel?

Gamolon · Oct 3, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

6. The NIST report fails to provide any information suggesting that the load capacity of the core and perimeter columns was exceeded at any time during the collapse sequence. NIST ignored the fact that the factor of safety of 3 in the core columns and 5 in the perimeter columns would have prevented the failure mechanism that is theorized in their collapse initiation model.
Click to expand...

Do you know what "safety factors" mean Bobby?

yasureoktoo · Oct 3, 2018

Gamolon said: ↑

Bobby, care to link to the "documented" temperatures hot enough to melt steel?
Click to expand...

I'm curious why he needs temperatures to melt steel anyways.

yasureoktoo · Oct 3, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

. And these are just some of the reasons why there are 3,045 architect and engineer signatories (as of today and GROWING) to a petition demanding a "new" investigation into 9/11
.
Click to expand...

So, who, and what, qualifies these people to be architects and engineers.

yasureoktoo · Oct 3, 2018

And considering the height, and other circumstances, a 10 ton object could easily go 600 feet from the building.
Even further.

Gamolon · Oct 3, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

6. The NIST report fails to provide any information suggesting that the load capacity of the core and perimeter columns was exceeded at any time during the collapse sequence. NIST ignored the fact that the factor of safety of 3 in the core columns and 5 in the perimeter columns would have prevented the failure mechanism that is theorized in their collapse initiation model.
Click to expand...

This sounds like a point brought up by Tony Szamboti, which I asked him to explain. Here is what he said:

If 20% of the columns were severely damaged or severed then 80% of the capacity would remain. The intact factor of safety of the core columns was at least 3.00 to 1, so a loss of 20% would drop that to 2.40 to 1. So one would have to lose 60% of the yield strength before the remaining undamaged columns would begin to yield.
Click to expand...

Tony thinks that as long as the safety factor is greater than 1, there will be no problems.

On the first floor there were 47 core columns and 84 perimeter columns. According to Tony's thinking, we could sever 31 (66%) of the 47 core columns leaving us with a 1.02 to 1 core safety factor and 66 (79%) of the 84 perimeter columns leaving us with a perimeter safety factor of 1.05 to 1.

Just ridiculous!

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9344507#post9344507

Gamolon · Oct 3, 2018

yasureoktoo said: ↑

And considering the height, and other circumstances, a 10 ton object could easily go 600 feet from the building.
Even further.
Click to expand...

Yes, no explosions needed.

yasureoktoo · Oct 3, 2018

Gamolon said: ↑

Yes, no explosions needed.
Click to expand...

Even though some stuff in the building was explosive, nothing would be needed to send the objects outward, like tons of other things.
Just depends on what it hits going down, and the shape of the object could add more.
The building is not going to flatten in the same footprint, to much material.
It will leave a huge pile that will spread out far. Even looking at the pictures,debris is spread out a lot more than 600 feet.

yasureoktoo · Oct 3, 2018

Gamolon said: ↑

Yes, no explosions needed.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for him to explain why he needs to melt steel.
Naturally no explanation will be forthcoming.

Bob0627 · Oct 3, 2018

Gamolon said: ↑

care to link to the "documented" temperatures hot enough to melt steel?
Click to expand...

Already been done and don't need to anyway. There are many corroborating eyewitness claims of molten steel/iron/metal. None of these were investigated nor are there any documented official interviews of eyewitnesses who have made these claims and even a denial by John Gross (NIST lead engineer) that he had never heard of any.

Gamolon said: ↑

no explosions needed.
Click to expand...

Here's the problem Gamo. Whether they were "needed" or not is not the issue. What you're desperately trying to do is to be an apologist for the gross failure to officially investigate the many eyewitness claims of hearing, seeing, feeling and being injured by explosions. Including a claim by one whose son was killed by an EXPLOSION in the WTC tower.

https://www.ae911truth.org/get-involved/bobby-mcilvaine-act

You want to readily dismiss explosions without investigation. This is not science, it's plain denial (or pretense of denial). You are nobody worth anything Gamo. Worse, you're only here to defend the OCT 24/7 and question none of it. As such you immediately lose any credibility, not that you ever had any anyway as an anonymous poster in a mostly anonymous discussion forum. You want to pretend somehow you know better and more than experts who readily reveal themselves, can verify their credentials and have published many papers on the subject. You are nothing but a 2 bit snake oil salesman. There is not one thing genuine about you.

Note: To be sure I make no claims of having any credibility myself and that's why I cite sourced facts whenever I can, many from the OCT itself, and the opinions of real identifiable experts I find highly credible. And I question EVERYTHING about the OCT because it's simply intellectually insulting as you are. So, far from saying I know it all (I readily admit I don't and I'm still in the process of investigating 9/11, that will never end), I can say that I post what I can about the subject and will always add my opinion. If you don't like that, oh well, it's not any concern of mine. Whoever reads my posts is definitely entitled to their opinion about me or my motives/"agenda", including you of course and that's quite ok with me. It doesn't ever change anything for me.

Scott · Oct 4, 2018

I'm still waiting for a response to post #1369.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-pentagon-on-9-11.482175/page-69#post-1069695034

Gamolon · Oct 4, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

Already been done and don't need to anyway.
Click to expand...

No it hasn't! There is no documented/measured temperatures at or above the melting point of steel, which is 2500F (1370C). Quit lying.

Gamolon · Oct 4, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

Here's the problem Gamo. Whether they were "needed" or not is not the issue.
Click to expand...

That's the claim you are supporting Bobby! That explosives are responsible for "laterally ejecting 4 ton steel assemblies out to 600 feet".

First of all, not one truther has come forth with the numbers to show how much would be needed to accomplish this. Second, show me a picture of the actual 4 ton steel assembly that was ejected 600 feet. Or are you guessing again?

Gamolon · Oct 4, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

This is not science, it's plain denial
Click to expand...

I take it by your non-answer that you have no clue about safety factors or just how ridiculous Tony's claim is? You just like to parrot things as long as they supposedly support your fantasies.

Bob0627 · Oct 4, 2018

Not interested Gamo. Post something I can respond to, all the above is worthless trash I have no use for. I already posted what I want to post on the subject, I'm not going to repeat myself.

Shinebox · Oct 4, 2018

Scott said: ↑

I want to hear responses to post #1348 from all of the pro-official version posters. Here's the link to it.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-pentagon-on-9-11.482175/page-68#post-1069689675
Click to expand...

irrelevant unless you can link any of this to the events of 9/11 ... btw ... Coste vids commentary? ... how many times have I asked you? ...

Shinebox · Oct 4, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

Not interested Gamo. Post something I can respond to, all the above is worthless trash I have no use for. I already posted what I want to post on the subject, I'm not going to repeat myself.
Click to expand...

it's only worthless to you because you have no educated response ... you have no physics background and rely on youtube vids to speak for you ... sack up Bob and answer some ****ing questions or just admit that this is out of your spectrum of knowledge ...

yasureoktoo · Oct 4, 2018

Gamolon said: ↑

That's the claim you are supporting Bobby! That explosives are responsible for "laterally ejecting 4 ton steel assemblies out to 600 feet".

First of all, not one truther has come forth with the numbers to show how much would be needed to accomplish this. Second, show me a picture of the actual 4 ton steel assembly that was ejected 600 feet. Or are you guessing again?
Click to expand...

There were hundreds of tons of residue spread out more than 600 feet.

Bob0627 · Oct 4, 2018

Shinebox said: ↑

it's only worthless to you
Click to expand...

It's worthless to me just as you are worthless to me. Your only value to me is extraneous, just like all other OCT worshippers at least those who I don't consider 24/7 trolls. You're just the part time version.

Shinebox · Oct 5, 2018

Bob0627 said: ↑

It's worthless to me just as you are worthless to me. Your only value to me is extraneous, just like all other OCT worshippers at least those who I don't consider 24/7 trolls. You're just the part time version.
Click to expand...

the only people that have value or worth to you are fellow truthers ... that's your cocoon Bobby ...

Bob0627 · Oct 5, 2018

Shinebox said: ↑

the only people that have value or worth to you are fellow truthers
Click to expand...

They're not the only people but you're partially correct. The truth has immeasurable value, lies have immeasurable cost. Those who parrot and defend the OCT 24/7 are worthless. The reason is that there is nothing intelligent about repeating and defending lies. There is no value in repeating the OCT daily. All one has to do for that is post the links to the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST reports, it is an exercise in idiocy. Regurgitate lies and question nothing. You also remind me of a quote:

"Someone who does not know the difference between good and evil is worth nothing." - Miecyslaw Kasprzyk, Polish rescuer of Jews during the Holocaust

Log in or Sign up

The Pentagon on 9/11 - MODERATOR WARNING ISSUED

yasureoktoo Banned

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Shinebox Well-Known Member

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

yasureoktoo Banned

yasureoktoo Banned

yasureoktoo Banned

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

yasureoktoo Banned

yasureoktoo Banned

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Scott Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Shinebox Well-Known Member

Shinebox Well-Known Member

yasureoktoo Banned

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Shinebox Well-Known Member

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

The Pentagon on 9/11 - MODERATOR WARNING ISSUED

yasureoktoo Banned

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Shinebox Well-Known Member

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

yasureoktoo Banned

yasureoktoo Banned

yasureoktoo Banned

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

yasureoktoo Banned

yasureoktoo Banned

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Scott Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Gamolon Well-Known Member

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Shinebox Well-Known Member

Shinebox Well-Known Member

yasureoktoo Banned

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Shinebox Well-Known Member

Bob0627 Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches