Saturday, December 21, 2019

Radiation World Trade Center Debate 2019

This is not normal demolition steel scrap," said Anantha Padmanabhan, executive director of Greenpeace India. "Just look at the circumstances in which the twin towers came down. High-temperature incineration

Shipments of Scrap and Stress

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2002-01-27-0201270268-story.html



 Dr. Andre Rousseau is a former researcher in geophysics and geology at the National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) said the earthquakes were do to explosives.
9/11 Free Fall 1/10/13-- Interview with Dr. Andre Rousseau
[PDF]
Were Explosives the Source of the Seismic Signals Emitted ...
Daniel M. Plesse I’ve removed you’re post about Nukes at the towers, read the group rules before you post again, and if you’re going to post something don’t slag off this group, like you just did. When you post something give an explanation about the post, rather than random memes, and expect everyone to guess what you’re talking about.
Lou Napoli, Bill Lighthall and 2 others
34 Comments

Like
Comment
Comments


Debate Link
Molten World Trade Center Example
Tarik Alsafi
Tarik Alsafi
Original Author · 13h ago

“Your own expert doesn’t mention anything about radiation either”

What “expert” what are you talking about?

The point about India was the people were getting sick issue.

“ WTC Scrap Is Hazardous, Activists Say; Asia: Greenpeace complains that the metal is contaminated and endangering recyclers in India.”

Lets stick to this issues at hand.
911 Radiation Poisoning Ground Zero Indira Singh 2005
https://youtu.be/U35CcmmQtv8

Toxicology Exam Shows Radiation Poisoning

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiGbbkSZ2BQ

Yes the Jet Fuel part was dropped because you can’t incinerate steel with jet fuel. You can’t even soften steel until you hit 1,600 degrees via Dr. Astaneh-Asl a real expert who witnessed incinerated steel. i.e

https://youtu.be/PcXUmNxEsI0 You can see the reporter pushing for softening and undermining his incriminating statement.
Another quote you can look up.
"Dr. Astaneh-Asl also hopes to send samples of steel to Dr. Claudia P. Ostertag, a professor of civil engineering at Berkeley, for metallurgical testing. Above about 1,600 degrees Fahrenheit, the crystal structure of steel shifts to a softer, weaker form."
“Your own expert “?? The executive director of Greenpeace India is NOT an expert. He is more like tree loving hippie.
“There is every possibility that high levels of toxins are in the debris”

I don’t think the toxins were inside the steel on on the steel. Do you think the toxins survived the travel to India outside in the rain traveling across the sea in an open barge.
A visual of a scrape steel barge
Scrap Metal Barge Goes Up in Flames
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy41BiD7y3I
Tarik Alsafi
Tarik Alsafi
Original Author · Sun


I did not deliberately do anything. I was quoting from my own source which must have subtracted the “Jet fuel” part but all the rest validates 9/11 truth. The quote talks about incineration of steel. A fact hidden by the media.
You have to agree the quote of Jet Fuel Melting steel beams can’t be correct. Therefore your reaction should be that you agree with the edit not that it was a misquote.
Also the fact of molten steel at the World Trade Center has been validated by Greenpeace India.

This comment has been deleted · 21h ago
Tarik Alsafi
Tarik Alsafi
Original Author · 6h ago


“Dan you can’t deliberately misquote someone because it doesn’t conform with your version of reality” WHAT? This means you believe Jet Fuel CAN melt WTC Steel? THis is not reality this is what morons believe and you have been exposed. Good luck with your moron ideas.
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, December 9, 2019

9/11 Quora deleted My comments

Conversation with 
Michael Thomas
Dan Plesse
Did you delete your comment? Did I delete it by mistake trying to delete my reply? Anyway I saw someone was going to delete your comment  so I saved it here: 

If you didn't delete it can you cut and copy it back? Lets see if it deleted again!
https://911truthout.blogspot.com...
Sat
Michael Thomas
Hi Dan, I didn't delete the comment. The only comments I've ever had deleted on Quora have been if they were about 9/11. Quora deleted a comment back along, so I rarely bother answering questions on any topic now, just the occasional answer on bunkers.  Q- whore-a (as my friend Chakra likes to call them!) is of course no different to other mainstream sites, and the official story of 9/11 will get far more upvotes on here. You've got people like Charles Fletcher writing technical sounding "cobblers" which the "sheeple" lap up so that they can sleep well in La La land.

All the best, I'll write to you here later.
Sun
Michael Thomas
Hello again Dan. I think we're "fighting a losing battle" going against the official fairy tale and that most folks are not really that concerned about what really happened on 9/11, certainly that's my experience here in the UK locally. I know a vicar here, Jeff, who told me he'd received a long letter from another priest that was sure 9/11 was done with the help of the CIA. Jeff just told me he'd dismissed the letter as  ridiculous, and saying to me "as if the US government would do THAT to their own people".

As we know, all the media are as "bent as a 9 dollar bill" and complicit in covering up the hoax.  Kevin E Sjolund on here was telling me that he realised a long time ago that Quora is also a mouthpiece for the official story just pretending to be impartial and allowing discussion on "conspiracy theories" on here.

Someone asked me my thoughts on how 9/11 was done, after I'd commented on an answer that had got tens of 1000's of views, and several thousand upvotes, his answer confirming the WTCs fell due to gravity collapses and "pancaked down". The guy said he was a structural engineer, though my guess is he's probably a toffee salesman or something like that. My comment got quite a few upvotes, but then Quora took it off for "infringing their policy" NB presumably those "on high"  prefer the official 9/11  explanations and don't like anything that gets TOO near the truth. There was nothing offensive in it.

Brighton Jaimeson on here is among those writing good 9/11 stuff, but there are as you'll know many others , including ex-firefighter Adrian Mallet, and James Lingren. The biggest problem seems to be the; "but we saw the planes hit on TV and ALL the TV channels said Bin Laden did it" attitude. Even those that "look into 9/11 further" have often only watched mainstream documentaries such as by the BBC, "National Geographic", or "The History Channel". Often this corrupt lot just repeat what either NIST or the equally bent; "Popular Mechanics" criminals have come out with.

One thing  used time and time again is the; "but you see the steel only needed to get hot enough to weaken it, not melt, then once that happened OBVIOUSLY the WTCs would have lost their strength and collapsed ". No hope, as that convinces perhaps 75% of sheeple that the official explanations are true. The point that the Twin Towers didn't so much collapse, as 85% of them  turn to dust in roughly 11 seconds, doesn't register with these " our government CAN be trusted as we'd always known"  eager to be reassured folks.
Sun
Michael Thomas
Sorry, "SENT" too soon. My best friend on Quora, Chakra Simhan, despairs at how people believe the official 9/11 story. He went to university with a scientist that's worked on the Indian Space program and who told him that this idea of rocket fuel bringing down the WTCs like that is obviously "bollocks". But the trouble is that most scientists don't like to admit it in public for fear of ridicule or even losing their jobs.

 The mainstream media usually say stuff like:"Most scientists agree that the official WTC collapse explanations are correct". We'd say that a lot of scientists prefer to say nothing in public about the WTC collapse mechanisms, or if they do confirm them, it's because they just can't accept that people could be so wicked as to do that to their fellow Americans.

The book : " 9/11 revealed" makes the point that many scientists and engineers on first seeing the WTCs collapse thought to themselves that such collapses would be impossible without controlled demolition with something like explosives used, but with further thought they then overruled their brains and thought :"Well they DID collapse, and it was ONLY the planes that hit, so what other explanation could there possibly be?". Like NIST, who admitted they'd not looked for evidence of explosives "because explosives were ruled out right from the start", I've no doubt that if they were given an open tin of baked beans, but told no tin opener or implement of any kind was used to remove the lid, they'd come up with all these theories such as; "Agitation during transportation caused a build up of gasses inside the baked beans tin which put excessive pressure on the seam of the tin that had already been corroded due to reaction with the tomato sauce over some months, thus forcing off the baked bean tin lid as though it LOOKED like a tin opener had caused it!" It's the sort of crap that gets spouted with WTCs collapse. No hope mate.
Sun
Michael Thomas
That WTC7 fell for 105 feet at absolute freefall speed with zero  "heat weakened steel"  or "crushing concrete" slowing the fall is easy proof that all the columns were blown out of the way for those 8 floors. I've asked official story believers to explain this without explosives being used, but they just go silent, or waffle on about a different aspect of 9/11. Jonathan Buttall on here, (not his real name) who I know well, just went back to the "billons saw those planes hitting " response. He's a nice chap but seems to have a mental block that makes him believe the official 9/11 story, as do most people. Cheers.

something like this
...(more)
Nope not from a video, sorry. But no photos exists from a city filled with people taking photographs all day about this event and everyone of those people forgot to take this photo?
It was not just a U-turn. This plane if tracked back to source correctly would likely be from a strange source i.e the a PA controlled airport.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Search