See other 9/11 Articles
Title: View of a Military Expert: Why the Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed
Source:
www.serendipity
URL Source: http://www.serendipity.li/wot/finn/5/soldier5.htm
Published: Oct 22, 2006
Author: anonymous Finn
Post Date: 2006-10-22 12:30:26 by robin
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 2403
Comments: 275
View of a Military Expert: Why the Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed The airplanes did not a have true effect on the destruction of towers; they were needed to give an excuse for odd Orwellian wars at the same time when the USA is turned into a police nation, like the German Third Reich, to some extent. The towers took the impacts of crushing Boeing 767's. The towers were originally built to take impacts of Boeing 707's, which are approximately of the same size and was widely used in the 1970's. Fires that kindled from the fuel in the planes were too shortlasting and weak to be able to severely damage the structure of the skyscrapers. Even in the extreme situation, the heat from a kerosene fire cannot threat the durability of a steel trunk. With the temperature of carbohydrate fires that reaches only 825 °C (approx. 1517 °F) steel weakens at 800 °C (approx. 1470 °F) and melts at 1585 °C (approx. 2890 °F). In the skyscrapers of the WTC the surroundings were not at all ideal as there were far too many steel columns and they led heat away from the burning area. WTC 1 burned for 102 minutes and WTC 2 for 56 minutes only. A fire burning much longer, from 10 to 20 hours, could slowly increase the burning temperature down to perhaps 1100 °C (approx. 2010 °F). Provided there is more substance to burn, such a fire will damage concrete and irons, but not severely heavy steel constructions. In mid-February in Madrid, the Windsor Tower (see above) burned for over 20 hours, which led to a fire stronger and hotter than that in the WTC, but even the collapses of the Windsor Tower caused by the very strong and long-enduring fire were minimal and limited to the upper floors. If either of the WTC tower had started to collapse because of fires the collapse would have been limited to only a few of the floors and then stopped. The impossibility of a gravitational collapse is closer seen in other documents. A collapse would produce large pieces, and does not explain reports of fine dust from concrete, huge amounts of dust and pieces of steel ejected outwards. Destruction of the towers by explosions is clear according to the photographs and reports of the eye witnesses. In the picture below, a range of cutting charges have just exploded in the down left sector and a typical white cloud is formed outwards from the wall. Down right, explosions are seen as well. Even a flame is seen. In video tapes taken of the so-called collapses of the WTC, more explosions of these cutting charges can be seen. The explosions advance quickly, with a gap of a couple of floors, cutting the strong steel pillars in the outer wall. The explosions are timed so that it appears that the tower collapses occur in the same timing as in a gravitational collapse. The explosions are not completely synchronized in timing, probably a few charges are triggered by radio, and other charges explode out of the impulses of one of these charges (infrared, pressure wave). More challenging problems to the demolition men, however, were the central cores of the buildings and the 47 steel pillars more robust than the ones on the outer rounds. The pillars of the central cores were made of steel even 100 + 100 mm thick, thicker than the side armours of a battle tank. Cutting those, even with explosives, is extremely difficult. One would need to surround the whole pillars, every single pillar on every floor intended to get blasted, with powerful cutting charges. These charges would have needed to be placed in such a way that the users of the skyscrapers could not notice these preparations. As seen in the following pictures, the cores of the towers were not distracted by thousands of powerful cutting charges but by a modern thermonuclear explosive, a small hydrogen bomb. In the picture below, a hydrogen bomb explosion, the bomb having been placed in the cellar and directed to the core, has reached the roof of the tower and the upper parts of the outer walls. On its way up the waves of fire pressure partially penetrated about 100 floors of concrete and steel. Over ten million degrees of heat caused by a hydrogen bomb sublimised all water within the concrete in a moment. Water exploded extremely quickly into 24-fold volume and totally pulverized the concrete. Even people and computers that were in the buildings disappeared turning into heat and light. That is why almost nothing of them was found in the ruins. Burning radiation is absorbed in steel so quickly that steel heats up immediately over its melting point 1585 °C (approx. 2890 °F) and above its boiling point around 3000 C (approx. 5430 °F). In the pictures down below, super hot groups of steel pillars and columns, torn from wall by pressure wave, are sublimized. They immediately turn into a vaporized form, binding heat as quickly as possible. Bursts upwards, even visible in the picture below, are not possible for a gravitational collapse or for cutting charges which are used horizontally. In the upper picture the explosion is in theory 100 times stronger than in the picture below, but in practice the difference is only four times due to the capability of direction of the small hydrogen bomb. In the picture at the right, the brown shades caused by a hydrogen bomb are seen, while the top of the tower that is already collapsing is breaking down and the posture straightens up as the hydrogen bomb pulverized the core and it lost all its resistance. The piles point the blasts of the cutting charges. (Gehue plate 12) Extremely hot, sublimating pieces are not created with many methods. For comparison, pictures of subterranean nuclear explosions where the explosion is blasting onto surface and into the air: Ess1.2 Kt WTC 2 Banberry 10 Kt underground Radioactivity in air creates shades of brown. (The subterranean nuke in the picture on the right is 10 times stronger than the small nuke on the left.) This is the reason why the FBI did not search the crime scene. Ground zeros of nuclear weapons are a health risk and belong to the FEMA. Poster Comment: For the rest of this: Writings of a Finnish Military Expert on 9/11 Writings of a Finnish Military Expert on 9/11 Written in spring 2005, a modestly language-corrected version Corrected by another person than the original author. The photographs attached in this non-profit distribution are for securing volatile, important evidence on 9/11 for discussion and education. Author hereby grants full permission to reproduce the drawing 'The Bombs in the WTC' and his writings. You are encouraged to mail, publish and mass produce these documents or your enhanced versions of them. Due to concerns for his personal safety, the author has chosen to remain anonymous. And a glance at some of what he's fighting for (to keep it fair and balanced): 
Storax Sedan 104 Kt shallow underground
Steel pillars are turned into dust. 
The author has chosen to remain anonymous so I'll post this photo of a Finnish soldier. Why? Well because I like looking at Finns, even with green faces.
/9_11/$FILE/9_11.jpg)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: robin (#0)
Uhhhhhhhhhh...
Hey, he might be. What do you find wrong with his conclusions? BTW, there are other links I listed above the silly photos.
Uhhhhhhhhh.
Do you really believe the official govt story about how the towers "pancaked" and fell?
Well, Uhhhh is about the most intelligent offering I have. I failed structural engineering but I do not buy that there was extensive termite damage. I could have just given you a ping but there is no humor in that.
Sorry to hear you actually believe the govt version over the Laws of Physics. Have you viewed any of the 9/11 videos?
Have you viewed any of the 9/11 videos? Sorry to hear you actually believe the govt version over the Laws of Physics. Here I am trying to be helpful and am chastised for my effort. I believe NOTHING the government tells me but I did do rather well in physics. For instance, the law of gravity as discerned by Sir Isaac ruled at 9/11. Videos??? Many.. Have listened to endless "experts" from all sides of the argument. When anyone finally drags some poor soul in front of the cameras and he says, "I did it", I will be eager to listen.
Is that not what the second picture from the top looks like? You say - explosives did that? How did the wires and detonation initiating devices survive the fire to allow them to be set off? And if they did plant explosives they were damn good in placing the explosive charges just where the plane hit to make it seem the plane did it.. Occam's Razor tares that argument a new ream hole.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Okay, so what do you believe, if you don't believe the govt and you did well in physics? Let's just take the speed at which the buildings fell. Well documented from a variety of sources. I mean no disrespect, I hope you know that. BTW, there are a few new 9/11 videos that are better at explaining this than others. If you should want those links, I can post them.
You still haven't answered any of the questions I asked on the other thread. The speed at which the towers fell, the center core not still standing, the buildings falling within their own footprint, the squibs, Larry Silverstein's remark to "pull it", the odd activity reported by surviving tenants prior to 9/11, etc.
I did - you did not like the answer. In fact I proposed several theories - some very much implicating the govt - you on the other hand are a bot, robin. Americans on forums tend to be 'bots - some are pro bush-bots others are bots for other causes. The govt may very well be connected to 9/11 - but I discount the nutty notion of demolition charges in addition to plane strikes being the reason for the fall of the towers. In your nutty mind that is not enough. In fact to your nutty mind I must be pro govt even when I say the govt may be responsible somehow for the events of 9/11!! You strike me as a person who would be perfect for the inquisition - it is not enough you accept there is a god but that you view god like I view god. You mention you do not agree that the towers fell top down - then you provide a photo showing the top o f the tower falling down first - and you posted lots of pictures showing the structure tear itself apart from the top down. If you won't accept that the picture we are both looking at shows a top to down fall then we can never come to an agreement - it seems you types try and shoe horn all evidence into your notion. Gravity throws things downward - no surprise that the building would fall like a peeling banana - down with an arc. Not exactly a fall on the footprint. But I understand - America does not produce the brightest of people these days - which is probably why they elected a president that speaks his mind on a grade school level.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
What do I believe??? I saw what others saw. Aircraft hit the towers, resulting in a breaching of structural integrity, the law of gravity took over and down they came. One structural engineer posed the following question. "Considering that the buildings fell very nearly within their own footprints, why would anyone intent on destruction and slaughter be so careful, why not arrange to have the building topple so as to kill thousands more and cause widespread destruction"... There was no rebuttal.
So now you are dishonest too. No, you did not answer my questions. You did not answer how the buildings fell at the rate of a free fall w/o demolitions. You did not answer why the center core was not still standing if the buildings fell because they "pancaked" (there are no floors in the steel center core). You did not answer to any satisfaction or credibility why Larry Silverstein said to "pull it" for WTC7. Nor why only his buildings fell that day. Nor how he made so much $$ on the whole deal. That was a 3 part question.
I believe the belief in impossible conspiracies is a poison, one that will damage people for the rest of their lives. I know people out there who have been obsessed for almost 45 years over the Kennedy murder. So what if they prove there were three shooters, or his own driver shot him? What will they live for after that? What kind of life is that?
"We become what we behold. We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." -- Marshall McLuhan, after Alexander Pope and William Blake.
You heard the govt version and believed it. A govt structural engineer. Not one could explain, nor tried to explain why the center core was not still standing. Furthermore, in a pancake theory, the floor beneath would not be removed BEFORE the floor above hit it, allowing for a rate of speed that is free fall. This was a planned demolition. That is the only way buildings fall this way. One structural engineer posed the following question. "Considering that the buildings fell very nearly within their own footprints, why would anyone intent on destruction and slaughter be so careful, why not arrange to have the building topple so as to kill thousands more and cause widespread destruction"... There was no rebuttal. Planned demolitions fall into their own footprints. The goal was "a new Pearl Harbor" per Dov Zakheim in the PNAC document written in the '90s. They got it. They planned for it and they got it. Why didn't they set off a huge nuclear explosion for that matter? Why not blow up all of NYC? Why not blow up Tel-Aviv?
you wouldn't be asking those questions, Destro, if you really watched 911 Mysteries: Demolitions. oh, but that's right, you explained it all here: "they failed because they were softened by the fire. Steel turns to wet noodles in fire"
When it comes to heroes, Renegades are mine..
Conspiracies do exist..However they have bounds. Anytime we have a "GRAND" conspiricy however, the number of people involved is very small and tightly controlled. For 9/11 to have been one is believable, that goes without saying. However, for the mechanics of this scheme to be carried out would include untold numbers of "little" people with no interest in the plot. To date not one little person has come forward. Not one.
Prove it. Or did you mean near freefall speeds?
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
I saw what happened same as everyone else. The law of gravity ruled.
What kind of life is there in swallowing everything the govt tells you, without question? What kind of life is there for someone to deny the Laws of Physics because the govt tells them they don't matter anymore? That what they saw is not what they saw on 9/11? To paraphrase Burkeman1 this morning, If Tony Snow got up and said the sun now rises in the west and sets in the east, there are people who would just accept it.
The law of gravity does not allow for free fall speed w/o explosives removing the floor beneath each floor falling.
Who says I have not? How do you know the CIA did not back the creation of such video exposes to throw people off track and off balance? to taint the truth movement? Like using UFOs as a way to hide and explain experimental secret airplane testing and so on.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
In one conversation I heard the term of "weight compression" being used. Being not too bright, I kept my mouth closed so as to not show my ignorance. I did gather it had too do with weight of one floor being lowered to the one below and overstressing the structure.
Watch the videos, they explain it all with high school physics, the camera footage and graphs. There are many good sources of information on the web. But you don't really want to know. http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm That's the "pancake" theory. It doesn't work well with the speeds attained. WTC7 is really glaringly so. Unfortunately, there was a steel core that had no flooring. Yet it all came down too. No one govt even tries to explain that. And that Popular Science explanation written by the cousin of DHS Michael Chertoff, what a joke! The best part is, he tried to deny any connection at first. These people are all idiots. I'm convinced of it. And their arrogance allows them to believe they are actually smarter than the rest of us. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are all devoid of any morals that's all.
There are conspiracies. Roosevelt conspired to bring the U.S. into WWII. But the idea of a bunch of evil psychopathic geniuses pulling off an impossibly complex conspiracy like 9-11....it belongs in a cartoon, not in the realm of serious discussion.
"We become what we behold. We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." -- Marshall McLuhan, after Alexander Pope and William Blake.
If the intent was to bring it down within its own footprint, and cause minimal damage, I wonder why they did not blast two corners low down and topple the entire structure and really spread the destruction? Remember death and destruction was their goal?
There were no "litle people" involved with the Pearl Harbor thing. The death and destruction was left for the Japanese. Only the instigation came from the conspiritors.
Why didn't they hit several buildings throughout the city and really overwhelm the police, fire and rescue crews? If they were incredibly brilliant psychopathic geniuses it should have been a cinch. Blast Wall Street, blast the IRS, hit the White House with three planes (don't forget the explosives planted in the White House)...the possibilities are endless!
"We become what we behold. We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." -- Marshall McLuhan, after Alexander Pope and William Blake.
Good question, but with the 47 interior columns, I don't know that your plan would have achieved the desired result - but I'm not an engineer or demolition expert. After viewing the Finn's bomb photo comparisons, I find his theory compelling.
Was it? Or just a big event, a "new Pearl Harbor" as PNAC wanted. To bring down these buildings in this way accomplished that, gave Larry Silverstein an extremely handsome profit, also allowed him to avoid the expensive demolition required for buildings with asbestos. These buildings were operating at a loss according to the Port Authority. Only Larry's buildings fell that day. Others were damaged. This was catastrophic enough. And so dramatic. All demolitions are.
And who profited from the Pentagon attack? That cost taxpayers a billion dollars. Or was that and the other aircraft diversions?
The NeoSheviks have been robbing the US Treasury like there's no tomorrow. While Dov Zakheim was Comptroller of the Pentagon upwards of $3 trillion went missing. On 9/10/01 the day before 9/11, Rumsfeld held a news conference about the missing trillions under Zakheim's watch. The next morning the section of the Pentagon where the auditors work is demolished, along with a lot of important papers and computers and people. http://benfrank.net/patriots/news/national/pentagon_missing_trillions http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/05/18/MN251738.DTL Also it was the spot that had just been renovated: http://killtown.blogspot.com/2005/11/where-pentagon-was-hit.html http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1047.shtml
A mass murder to cover up a massive heist?? In the movies, it's usually the other way around. Calling Perry Mason...
But Sam Danner, a poster here said it was a drone not a piloted aircraft. He was a "witness". How could a drone possibly pick out the right section?
Sam Danner was banned. He is not a well person. And a drone, a missile or a piloted jet could easily have targeted the correct section, as you well know.
There may have been a heist too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/gold.html But the real purpose was the one stated in a PNAC report, a "new Pearl Harbor". Cui Bono? Well, that's where we come to greater Israel. Don't forget the 5 dancing Israelis videotaping the fall of the towers. And never forget Dick Cheney's offshore accounts.
What kind of life is there for someone to deny the Laws of Physics because the govt tells them they don't matter anymore? I don't believe anything the government tells me. You have used "the Laws of Physics" so often, and capitalized it every time, that it is clear to me you know nothing about them.
"We become what we behold. We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us." -- Marshall McLuhan, after Alexander Pope and William Blake.
Are you of the "wet noodle" theory that Destro holds to? http://srikant.org/core/phy11sep.html Laws of Physics : A Primer Belal E. Baaquie Core Curriculum National University of Singapore (corbeb@nus.edu.sg)
Comments (41 - 275) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestView of a Military Expert:
#2. To: Cynicom (#1)
(Edited)
#3. To: robin (#2)
What do you find wrong with his conclusions?
#4. To: Cynicom (#3)
#5. To: robin (#4)
Do you really believe the official govt story about how the towers "pancaked" and fell?
#6. To: Cynicom (#5)
#7. To: robin (#6)
Sorry to hear you actually believe the govt version over the Laws of Physics.
#8. To: robin, Cynicom (#4)
Do you really believe the official govt story about how the towers "pancaked" and fell?
#9. To: Cynicom (#7)
#10. To: Destro (#8)
#11. To: robin, Cynicom (#10)
You still haven't answered any of the questions I asked on the other thread.
#12. To: robin (#9)
Okay, so what do you believe, if you don't believe the govt and you did well in physics?
#13. To: Destro (#11)
#14. To: Cynicom (#12)
I saw what others saw. Aircraft hit the towers, resulting in a breaching of structural integrity, the law of gravity took over and down they came.
#15. To: Cynicom (#12)
(Edited)
#16. To: Destro (#8)
#17. To: YertleTurtle (#14)
What kind of life is that?
#18. To: robin (#13)
You did not answer how the buildings fell at the rate of a free fall w/o demolitions.
#19. To: robin (#15)
You heard the govt version and believed it.
#20. To: YertleTurtle, Burkeman1 (#14)
#21. To: Cynicom (#19)
#22. To: christine (#16)
you wouldn't be asking those questions, Destro, if you really watched 911 Mysteries: Demolitions. oh, but that's right, you explained it all here:
#23. To: robin (#0)
Compelling photographic evidence - thanks for this one.
#24. To: robin (#21)
The law of gravity does not allow for free fall speed w/o explosives removing the floor beneath each floor falling.
#25. To: Destro (#18)
#26. To: Cynicom (#24)
#27. To: Cynicom (#17)
Conspiracies do exist..However they have bounds.
#28. To: robin (#26)
That's the "pancake" theory.
#29. To: YertleTurtle (#27)
Roosevelt conspired to bring the U.S. into WWII.
#30. To: Cynicom (#28)
If the intent was to bring it down within its own footprint, and cause minimal damage, I wonder why they did not blast two corners low down and topple the entire structure and really spread the destruction?
#31. To: Cynicom (#28)
I wonder why they did not blast two corners low down and topple the entire structure and really spread the destruction?
#32. To: Cynicom (#28)
Remember death and destruction was their goal?
#33. To: robin (#32)
To bring down these buildings in this way accomplished that, gave Larry Silverstein an extremely handsome profit, also allowed him to avoid the expensive demolition required for buildings with asbestos.
#34. To: Cynicom (#33)
#35. To: Cynicom (#33)
Or was that and the other aircraft diversions?
#36. To: robin (#34)
The next morning the section of the Pentagon where the auditors work is demolished, along with a lot of important papers and computers and peopl
#37. To: Cynicom (#36)
#38. To: jessejane, Cynicom (#35)
#39. To: robin (#20)
(Edited)
What kind of life is there in swallowing everything the govt tells you, without question?
#40. To: YertleTurtle (#39)
(Edited)
.
.
.