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: 2815
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
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 122.
#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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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. Can I ask why you think this subgroup has latched on to this complex conspiracy like a religion?
Why latch onto a story that has been so thoroughly debunked? Anti conspiracy adherence to obvious lies reminds me of membership in a toxic cult. I would say the only ones in it are the truly clueless of shills trying to prop up the wilting patchwork of lies that the official story is.
Don't be stupid. You types sound like Catholics who rush to get the flock back in line with the dogma just as dogmatic as the 911 Commission adherents. If you read the conversation between yertle and I you would note that we accept the possibility - nay the probability of a conspiracy - just that we discount the demolitions were part of the equation. Read it again slow and easy.
Agreed
I can't square the testimony of William Rodriquez, and others, who were in the basement of the N. tower? when they heard - and felt - explosions. Countless of people were injured and are available for MSM interview at any time. Of course you'll never see them save for the internet. These explosions were before the planes struck, btw. I've listened to liars all my life and nothing in his testimony suggests he isn't telling the truth.
my favorite post on the thread
If they are in the basement how did they survive? if it was a controlled demo designed to make the building collapse on its foot print you would have to have the charges set in the basement! Oops on your part.
no, oops on your part. William Rodriquez's testimony was featured extensively in 911 Mysteries: Demolitions. you didn't watch it.
I did. Assuming he is telling the truth and his times are correct, I have no explanation. I have wondered if at any time anyone posed the question to demolition experts as to how many men, how long it would take and what would be the cost to rig the three buildings for controlled failure. I think an answer would be interesting.
Demolitions. you didn't watch it. I did. Assuming he is telling the truth and his times are correct, I have no explanation. I have wondered if at any time anyone posed the question to demolition experts as to how many men, how long it would take and what would be the cost to rig the three buildings for controlled failure. I think an answer would be interesting. For a demolition to bring the building down on its footprints as you say - you need them placed in the basement - and no way is anyone getting out alive- especially the amount of explosive you will need - unlike normal demolitions - no gutting is taking place of the structure - you are overcompensating the explosives - plus how they could get by drilling all those hols to wrap a HUGE amount of explosives around beams/columns without anyone noticing is impossible. You guys are in the comic book world where they slap explosives on the wall and set some wires in it or something. You guys are all over the place - explosives on every floor - explosives in the basement - but survivors in the basement - no knowledge on how much more explosives is needed to compensate for not gutting the building's structural strength before hand.
Guys??? Firstly, Christine aint no guy, I am. Secondly your reading comprehension has slipped. I asked a logical question...Did anyone ever ask a demolition expert his opinion.
I asked a logical question...Did anyone ever ask a demolition expert his opinion. Yea - and they were called CIA agents by the other side.
There are no replies to Comment # 122. End Trace Mode for Comment # 122.
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.
#9. To: Cynicom (#7)
#12. To: robin (#9)
Okay, so what do you believe, if you don't believe the govt and you did well in physics?
#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.
#17. To: YertleTurtle (#14)
What kind of life is that?
#27. To: Cynicom (#17)
Conspiracies do exist..However they have bounds.
#64. To: YertleTurtle (#27)
There are conspiracies. Roosevelt conspired to bring the U.S. into WWII.
#65. To: Destro (#64)
"Can I ask why you think this subgroup has latched on to this complex conspiracy like a religion?"
#67. To: Ferret Mike (#65)
(Edited)
Why latch onto a story that has been so thoroughly debunked? Anti conspiracy adherence to obvious lies reminds me of membership in a toxic cult.
#73. To: Destro (#67)
we accept the possibility - nay the probability of a conspiracy - juts that we discount the demolitions were part of the equation.
#78. To: What of the explosions in the basement of the towers? (#73)
(Edited)
#95. To: Jethro Tull (#78)
I can't square the testimony of William Rodriquez, and others, who were in the basement of the N. tower? when they heard - and felt - explosions. Countless of people were injured and are available for MSM interview at any time. Of course you'll never see them save for the internet. These explosions were before the planes struck, btw. I've listened to liars all my life and nothing in his testimony suggests he isn't telling the truth.
#97. To: christine, Jethro Tull, yertleturtle, Cynicom (#95)
can't square the testimony of William Rodriquez, and others, who were in the basement of the N. tower? when they heard - and felt - explosions.
#107. To: Destro (#97)
If they are in the basement how did they survive?
#108. To: christine (#107)
Demolitions. you didn't watch it.
#114. To: Cynicom, christine (#108)
#119. To: Destro (#114)
You guys are in the comic book world where they slap explosives on the wall and set some wires in it or something.
#122. To: Cynicom (#119)
Firstly, Christine aint no guy, I am. Secondly your reading comprehension has slipped.
Replies to Comment # 122.