Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts


Go Back   Vanguard News Network Forum > News & Discussion > General Discussion
Donate Register Multimedia Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Login

 
Thread Display Modes Share
Old July 1st, 2012 #1
Pat Bateman
Member
 
Pat Bateman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dorsia
Posts: 342
Pat Bateman
Default Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

Some Physical Chemistry Aspects of Thermite, Thermate, Iron-Aluminum-Rich Microspheres,
the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System
as Applied to the Demise of Three World Trade Center Buildings on 9/11/2001

By
Jerry Lobdill
June 15, 2007


Introduction

It has been established through a study of the photographic and video evidence that there were a number of instances of white hot areas that produced glowing liquid flows from window openings on the 80th to 82nd floor of WTC 2 that persisted for quite a number of seconds. According to the NIST FAQ[1] these events came within the last 7 minutes before WTC 2 began its collapse. White-hot temperatures cannot be produced by ordinary fires. These observations have therefore been conclusively shown to be incendiary events. This fact is inconsistent with any theory of collapse except controlled demolition. Yet the official story remains that the buildings were brought down by fires and damage to the structural members of the buildings resulting from the impact of the planes. The WTC 7 wasn’t even hit by a plane, yet it is claimed that it was brought down by fires.

All three buildings, WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7 were subjects of many video documents that remain today as some of the very best evidence for controlled demolition that we have. It is clear from the videos that explosives were used. The evidence for incendiary cutting of steel consists of the video evidence, the forensic evidence in the dust and rubble, and the testimony of eyewitness early responders and survivors who saw glowing molten metal flowing out of window openings.

This paper deals with the incendiary events and the forensic evidence that remains to prove that the official story is wrong. Specifically, this paper discusses the chemistry of iron-aluminum-rich microspheres that are found in the dust from the rubble, the chemical content of these microspheres and the physical chemistry of the iron-sulfur-oxygen system since sulfur is one of the omnipresent elements in the iron-aluminum-rich microspheres and was also found in a metallurgical study of structural iron from the WTC 7[2].


Dr. Steven Jones discovered the iron aluminum-rich microspheres and has analyzed their elemental composition using XEDS analysis.3 This discovery, of recent date, is a very important addition to the body of evidence that disproves the official story. At the present time the interpretation of these microspheres is still under discussion as is the composition of the incendiary they imply.

This paper brings the subject of physical chemistry into the investigation and suggests some new possibilities that should be considered to enhance the scientific basis of the claim that incendiary devices were employed in the demolition of the WTC buildings.

Physical chemistry is a subject that bridges physics and chemistry. It involves the study of the interactions between matter and energy. Whereas chemistry is concerned primarily with the material changes that occur in reactions, and physics may be regarded as a study of energy and its transformations, physical chemistry is concerned with both of these subjects. The influence of physical factors such as temperature, pressure, concentration, electricity, and light, both on the reacting substances and the reactions is studied in physical chemistry to better understand the fundamental nature of chemical change. The thermodynamics of changes in matter is an area we will discuss in this paper in connection with 9/11. We will also be interested in surface tension.

It is important that an alternate theory of the demise of the WTC towers be consistent with physical chemistry principles, and it is to that end that this paper is dedicated.

About Thermite

The evidence is overwhelming that thermite or a thermite-like mixture was used in the WTC 2 tower very shortly before the building fell. What was the purpose of this? Thermite has been used to weld railroad rail sections together and also to cut structural steel. It has also been used for military purposes such as destroying guns and other weapons, disabling engines, and to rapidly destroy cryptographic machines. It appears that in the WTC it was used to cut structural steel in an early phase of controlled demolition.

This use implies that whatever the task, it had to be completed in the last minute or so before the building began to fall. Any chemical process that continued after the primary task was completed is simply an unavoidable sequela of the primary purpose.

An excellent article on thermite is posted in wikipedia at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite#Types.
There are a number of possible reactions that could produce large amounts of heat that could be used to melt (cut) steel.
For example,

Fe2O3 + 2Al Al2O3 + 2Fe

3FeO + 2Al Al2O3 + 3Fe

3Fe3O4 + 8Al 4Al2O3 + 9Fe

3CuO + 2Al Al2O3 + 3Cu

These reactions all produce a free metal and release a large quantity of heat that leaves a residue of very hot molten metal. It is not the purpose of this paper to analyze each of these reactions (and others) that could be used to cut structural steel. We are not interested here in comparing the relative merits of these reactions. We will restrict our attention to the first reaction and show how to determine how much thermite is needed to cut a given amount of structural steel.

One thing to notice about these equations is that they produce no gas that could be used to force the molten metal against the solid structural steel to be cut. That is a problem if vertical surfaces are to be cut (as in the WTC).

Engineering Considerations and the Use of Thermate

Spectre Enterprises’s patent for a linear pyrotechnic cutting device shows a stack of charge containers that are cylindrical with a slit nozzle in the wall parallel to the axis of the cylinder.
The cylinder height is much smaller than the diameter. The molten liquid is forced out of the nozzle into contact with the steel object to be cut. This would seem to imply that there are additives in the charge that produce hot gas to provide the pressure to force out the liquid.[4] The
gas is provided by an air filled empty space in the reaction chamber in the patent for Thermate-
TH3[5]. Other methods of providing the required gas have also been used.

About Thermate

When sulfur is added to thermite the result is called thermate. Other reaction enhancing chemicals may also be added. Thermate is said to have superior steel cutting capabilities compared with thermite for reasons that have not yet been fully explained. In this section we will discuss what is known about the properties of thermate that may have some bearing on its cutting properties.

What does the addition of sulfur do?

Ignition of thermite causes the reaction mix to be heated to white-hot temperatures (~ 2500 C).
Monoclinic sulfur melts at 119.25 C and boils at 444.6 C. However, sulfur and iron are miscible, and research has shown that the Fe-S binary system at one atmosphere of pressure forms a liquid at temperatures as high as 1800 C, far above the boiling point of sulfur alone. The phase
behavior of this system has been studied extensively. Figure 1 is the phase diagram of the Fe-S system at 1 atmosphere of pressure.


For our purposes we consider Fe-S mixtures that contain 31.4% by weight sulfur (the point x in Figure 1) or less. At 31.4% sulfur and 994 C[6] the system is at the eutectic point; i.e., the lowest
temperature at which liquid can exist in a mixture of S and Fe.

In the liquid state the mixture (at any concentration) is homogeneous. However, the solid state is heterogeneous and the character of its heterogeneity at any given concentration may be dependent on the history of its solidification process. Certain domains of the solid mixture in the phase diagram are characterized by different crystal structures. Figure 1 assumes that no other elements are in contact with the Fe-S system. If there is any space above the surface of the mix in the closed system that space will contain gaseous sulfur.

A complication occurs if the system is open to the air. In that case we have a ternary system, Fe-S-O. This was the case in the WTC situation. Of course, oxygen is a diatomic gas, O2, at all temperatures of interest here. Solid sulfur will ignite rather easily in air. Its flash point is 207.2 C, and its self ignition point is 237.2 C. So our system contains solid, liquid, and gaseous
phases. We have not only a ternary system, but one which forms compounds, FeO and FeS under various conditions of temperature and concentrations of Fe, S, and O. And we know that FeO and FeS form a binary eutectic system[7], so that it is possible to have heterogeneous mixtures of solid FeS, FeO, Fe, and S. The phase diagram for FeO and FeS is given in Figure 2. The temperature scale is Celsius.



Figure 2-- FeO-FeS Phase Diagram

A further complication is the fact that FeO and FeS are non-stoichiometric compounds. That is, they do not contain exactly as many atoms of one element as they do of the other. This means that the crystal structure is not regular, but has unpredictable irregularities that cause granularity.
There can be interfacial areas that are cationic and others that are anionic, contributing to
corrosion of Fe over time. The corrosion rates are unknown.[8]

One must also consider time scales for phase transformations in an environment where temperature gradients are severe and heat is conducted rapidly. The phase diagrams depict equilibrium states, and we have already noted that the heterogeneous structure of the solid that
results upon cooling when ambient temperature is reached may depend on the rapidity of cooling.

The efficiency of cutting steel depends on effective heat transfer as well. We know empirically that when a white-hot liquid thermate reaction mixture is sprayed from a nozzle against steel at room temperature it cuts through the steel more easily than does reacting thermite that is simply
in contact with the steel.

In addition to sulfur, other chemicals such as Ba(NO3)2 may be added. It is said that the reaction is speeded up as a result of adding KMnO4. These chemicals may decompose due to the heat and form compounds that may act as catalysts, not as a source of extra oxygen for, say, the purpose of providing gas for propelling the thermate mixture. A catalyst does not react in its role.
It remains unchanged after the reaction has gone to completion.

The observations of Barnett, Biederman, and Sisson (BB&S) (See Footnote 2) describe sulfidation of some structural steel from WTC 7. They say:
“Rapid deterioration of the steel was a result of heating with oxidation in combination with intergranular melting due to the presence of sulfur. The formation of the eutectic mixture of iron oxide and iron sulfide lowers the temperature at which liquid can form in this steel. This strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached ~1000 C, forming the eutectic liquid by a process similar to making a “blacksmith’s weld” in a hand forge.”[9]
And they conclude:
“The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 [10] are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure.”
We should take note of the fact that they are saying they have no idea of the rapidity of the sulfidation and oxidation processes or when they began. They also seem to be aware of the fact that there were large volumes of red hot metal below the rubble piles. (This is rather interesting since NIST, their sponsor, claims they are unaware of any such thing. )[11]

Now consider the problem of the molten metal flowing from the 82nd floor of WTC 2. Some have suggested that this metal was the eutectic mixture of Fe and S. Let’s discuss that possibility.
We assume that the steel that is cut from the columns is essentially pure Fe. It is melted and mixes with the thermate reaction products and then flows away by gravity. As the mixture cools,
if the original molten mix was at S < 31.4%, Fe begins to crystallize out. This increases the S% in the remaining mix. As the cooling continues, the S% increases until it reaches 31.4%, and this remaining molten eutectic mixture solidifies at 994 C (or 988 C, depending on which measurement you believe). So unless the original S% was 31.4%, the molten mass is crystallizing out solidified Fe as it flows downhill and cools. When, in the cooling process, the molten mass reaches the eutectic composition, it also reaches the eutectic temperature. At that temperature the remaining liquid gives up its latent heat of fusion and crystallizes as microscopically heterogeneous solid with a (macroscopically) 31.4% S, 68.6% Fe composition.
Once all the material has solidified the entire mass resumes cooling. We thus have a plausible explanation of why the material flowing from WTC 2 was orange-hot liquid (~1000 C).
However, if the thermate contained only 2% S by weight (as specified for Thermate-TH3)[12], that would not be enough to even produce a eutectic mixture using all the Fe produced in the thermate reaction, let alone all the added Fe from the cut column. It is not likely that the amount of sulfur used would have produced a product close to the eutectic mixture; however any substantial amount of sulfur will usefully lower the melting point of the attacked steel by sulfidation.

About the iron-aluminum-rich microspheres

Dr. Jones[13] found these microspheres in WTC dust that deposited in an apartment about 100
yards away from one of the towers. They contain Fe, Al, S, K, Mn and other elements in small percentages. Iron is a major component of these objects.

The spherical shape of the microspheres is caused by surface tension acting on tiny molten droplets. This is the only mechanism by which the spherical shape can be explained. Therefore, these microspheres are proof that molten iron was produced in the process that caused the demise of the WTC towers, a remarkable fact that does not fit the official story. Some of these microspheres are hollow, and Dr. Jones has determined that the inside surface of these spheres contain sulfur. This is consistent with a molten droplet containing some gaseous sulfur. The physics of this situation is the same as for bubbles. The surface tension and the internal gas pressure cause the radius of the bubble to adjust to balance these two forces.

Thermite Heat Balance Analysis

It is all well and good to compare heats of reaction for various thermite analog reactions. But for purposes of cutting steel one needs to know how much thermite is needed to cut a particular size of steel column successfully. The cutting charge must melt the steel and heat the molten mass, including the reaction products, sufficiently to allow it to flow away from the cut before it solidifies. We cannot precisely determine how hot the molten mass must be through analysis, but we can determine the amount of thermite needed to heat the molten mass to its highest temperature. This analysis is useful for charge size estimation purposes.

I have computed the amount of steel that can be cut away per gram of Fe3O4-Al thermite given a desired final temperature of the molten mix. This is done using chemical engineering thermodynamics methods.

In doing the heat balance I assume that all quantities are in stoichiometricproportions. I also assume that the heat of reaction is consumed in heating all the products of the reaction at 100% efficiency.

The calculations and data for this heat balance are a bit complicated and have been relegated to the Appendix. Figure 3 gives the results of the heat balance calculations.

The higher the maximum temperature reached by the molten mix, the longer it will remain molten as it flows away from the cut. But we pay a price to increase that maximum temperature.
Addition of sulfur decreases the temperature at which the molten mix solidifies and increases the time available for the molten mix to flow away from the cut. Adding sulfur would decrease the required maximum temperature, and thus, decrease the amount of thermite needed to do a particular job. Only experimentation can determine what the optimum proportion of sulfur would be to minimize the amount of thermite needed to accomplish the desired cut.


Conclusions

This paper has discussed some physical chemistry aspects of thermite and thermate and shown how science explains the existence of iron-aluminum-rich microspheres, why some microspheres are hollow, and why the metallurgical forensic study produced the results it did. The thermodynamic analysis has provided an understanding of how much thermite is needed to cut away a given amount of steel at 100% efficiency. The complexity of the chemistry involved has been illuminated.

These analyses enhance our understanding of the evidence that proves the use of incendiary devices in demolition of the WTC buildings.



Footnotes:

1http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm,
2http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...WTC_apndxC.htm, by Jonathan Barnett, Ronald R.
Biederman, R. D. Sisson, Jr. of Worcester Polytechnic Institute
3 “Revisiting 9/11/2001—Applying the Scientific Method”, by Dr. Steven Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, V 11, May
2007
4 "Thermite mixtures of metals and fuels such as aluminum, zirconium, magnesium, boron or titanium; oxides such
as iron oxide, common chemical oxidizers such as nitrates and perchlorates, halogen containing polymers and other
gas producing materials, such as fluorocarbon (e.g. polytetrafluoroethylene) are typical." From Patent detail, Spectre
Enterprises. See post by Ferric Oxide, March 23, 2007 at
http://www.phpbbserver.com/stj911/vi...=asc&start=40&
mforum=stj911
5http://www.dodtechmatch.com/DOD/Pate...ion&id=6766744
6 Other measurement data shows a eutectic temperature of 988 C. The exact value is not critical for our discussion.
7 Thanks to Dr. Richard D. Sisson, Jr. for this information.
8 See Footnote 2, Barnett, Biederman, and Sisson
9 See Footnote 2.
10 From WTC 7 and WTC 1 or 2, respectively.
11 John Gross, Video presentation at UT Austin, http://www.pnacitizen.org/john_gross_nist_pnac.php
12 See Footnote 5.
13 See Footnote 3

Further reading Here
__________________
....and this time, Hymie - We Go Vertical!
 
Old July 1st, 2012 #2
The Bobster
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Filthydelphia
Posts: 10,095
Default Re: Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

As the article states, thermite is used to weld girders. Why are people surprised to find it there?

Exothermic_welding Exothermic_welding
 
Old July 1st, 2012 #3
Pat Bateman
Member
 
Pat Bateman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dorsia
Posts: 342
Pat Bateman
Default America the Target: 9-11 and Israel's History of False Flag Terrorism

America the Target: 9-11 and Israel's History of False Flag Terrorism
Christopher Bollyn




U.S. President George W. Bush, flanked by Israeli leaders Ehud Olmert and Shimon Peres



Millions of Americans have blindly accepted, without any proof, the government and controlled media's tale that nineteen Arabs, who lacked basic piloting skills, were responsible for the coordinated precision aerial attacks and subsequent carnage and destruction of 9-11. On the other hand, the same government and media have shown absolutely no interest in probing the evidence or looking into the many unanswered questions surrounding the attacks. There can only be one logical explanation for the persistent avoidance of the evidence by the institutions that should be leading the investigation. They have avoided the evidence because it does not fit or contradicts the fictitious tale they have presented to the public.

The number of people who realize that the government and media have lied about 9-11 is significant and continues to grow all the time. The pack of lies surrounding the attacks has been thoroughly exposed and can no longer be supported. Unable to defend their fictional tale in the face of facts and evidence presented by honest scientists and writers, the defenders of the 9/11 lies use disinformation, defamation, and slander to try and prevent the truth from spreading like wildfire.

ISRAELI PRIOR KNOWLEDGE

While the evidence indicates that the Israelis had prior knowledge of 9-11, commonly-held misconceptions about Israel and a general lack of understanding of Zionism's brutal history of terrorism prevent most people from comprehending the Israeli connection. An ignorance of Zionist history, cultivated by the controlled media, prevents people from understanding reality in the Middle East. It is essential to have a grasp of the history of previous Israeli attacks on the United States to understand 9/11. This chapter examines a few little-known, but key events in the history of Israeli false-flag terror attacks and the Zionist planners behind them. The names and events discussed in this chapter are at the center of Zionist terrorism, false-flag and otherwise.

"False-flag" terrorism means an act of terror planned and perpetrated by one party for the purpose of having the blame assigned to its enemy for political or strategic purposes. 9-11, like many of the terror attacks that have occurred in occupied-Iraq, was a textbook false-flag operation. False-flag attacks are designed to foment hostility or instigate war between groups or nations.

Only very rarely has the United States, oceans away from the conflicts of Europe and Asia, actually been attacked by foreign militaries. The British invasion during the War of 1812 and the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941 are the only two foreign attacks, prior to 9-11, that come to mind. Although 9-11 is disguised and interpreted by the government and media as an act of terrorism carried out by Islamic fanatics, the evidence indicates that it was a carefully planned false-flag attack carried out by the Israeli military after years of planning and preparation.


"Why should they, the Americans, have trusted us? We were a bunch of Russians; socialist Russians."
- Isser Harel, founder of Israeli intelligence, on U.S. relations with Israel

EVIDENCE OF ISRAELI INVOLVEMENT

This is not a hypothesis that can be easily dismissed as based on speculation or prejudice. There is solid evidence that Israeli intelligence agencies had prior knowledge of 9-11, which is indicative of involvement in the attacks. Public statements made by key terror suspects, the five jubilant "movers" arrested in New Jersey, for example, who were actually Israeli intelligence agents, indicate that they possessed prior knowledge of the attacks.

In November 2001, after two months in U.S. custody, three of the five agents appeared on Israeli television and admitted, in plain Hebrew, that their purpose had been to document the event. The Israeli interviewer did not ask the men who had sent them, but it is quite clear they were working for Israeli intelligence.

The five fake movers from Urban Moving Systems of Weehawken, New Jersey, were actually operatives of the Israeli secret services. The five Israeli agents, described in early news reports as "Middle Eastern," had been sought by the FBI and New Jersey authorities after they had been seen celebrating and photographing the destruction of the World Trade Center. The Israelis made a video of themselves with the burning towers behind them as they flicked their cigarette lighters, laughed, and celebrated as hundreds of innocent people were being roasted alive. Reportedly, they had worn Palestinian or Arab garb, which was later found in their van.

Two of the five Israelis, who were caught with multiple passports, box cutters, thousands of dollars stuffed into their socks, and driving a van that tested positive for explosives, were actually on a list of foreign intelligence agents known to U.S. law enforcement authorities at the time.

ABC News did a follow up on the Israeli agents in June 2002:
The arresting officers said they saw a lot that aroused their suspicion about the men. One of the passengers had $4,700 in cash hidden in his sock. Another was carrying two foreign passports. A box cutter was found in the van. But perhaps the biggest surprise for the officers came when the five men identified themselves as Israeli citizens.

‘We Are Not Your Problem’

According to the police report, one of the passengers told the officers they had been on the West Side Highway in Manhattan "during the incident" — referring to the World Trade Center attack. The driver of the van, Sivan Kurzberg, told the officers, "We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem." The other passengers were his brother Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner, and Omer Marmari.
The five "movers" were evidently part of a much larger Israeli terror operation in New York City. The Urban Moving Systems company was later exposed as a Mossad "front" company, a fake agency set up to facilitate their terror operation. An American who worked with the company said he was shocked to see that the Israeli employees had openly rejoiced over the attacks.

In November 2001, the five Israeli agents and terror suspects were returned to Israel on "visa violations" although they first repeatedly refused to take, and then failed lie detector tests concerning their involvement in 9-11.

Instant messages warning of the attack at the WTC, predicting the event to the precise minute, sent via the Mossad-owned Odigo messaging system hours before the first plane hit the North Tower, are further evidence that members of Israeli intelligence agencies had very specific and accurate knowledge of the terror attacks – long before they occurred.

In a complex and elaborately planned crime of mass murder and terrorism like 9-11, possession of specific prior knowledge like that held by the fake Israeli movers and the senders of the Odigo messages is clearly evidence of involvement in the crime.

Had the recipients of the Odigo warnings contacted the responsible authorities in New York City, thousands of lives would have been saved. If these people were not complicit in the crime, why didn't they contact the authorities? Taking the evidence of Israeli prior knowledge into consideration with the Israeli military's capability to launch such a sophisticated false-flag terror attack, the obvious question has to be asked: Would Israeli military agencies commit such an atrocious act of terrorism in the United States in order to achieve a strategic goal?

The question whether Israeli strategic planners would conduct a false-flag terror attack against the United States, their most powerful ally, in order to fix the blame on the Arabs, their enemies, raises several specific questions:
1. Has the Israeli military conducted false-flag terror attacks against the United States in the past?

2. If so, are there links between the people or agencies involved in the previous terror attacks and 9-11?

3. Is there a strategic goal for which Zionist planners would commit such a terrorist atrocity?

4. If so, has that strategic goal been realized as a result of 9-11?
The answer to all four questions is yes. The Israeli military has a documented history of conducting military and false-flag terror attacks against the United States. It also has a history of withholding information from the United States about threats that it has knowledge of.

Specific Zionist extremists are, furthermore, the prime suspects with the strongest motives for carrying out 9-11. The Zionist motive was to kick-start their long-planned U.S.-led "War on Terror" with a spectacular terror attack against the United States. Like any other crime, solving 9-11 requires that we diligently investigate those suspects with strong motives and prior histories of committing similar crimes. There are Israeli suspects who fit this description. On the other hand, there is no reasonable Arab motive to attack the World Trade Center or the Pentagon. Why would Arabs or Moslems commit such a counter-productive act? Why would any Arab organization commit a senseless crime knowing that it would invite a U.S. military invasion of their nation or another Islamic nation? The Arab/Islamic terror scenario makes very little sense.


ISRAEL'S HISTORY OF TERROR
"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."
- David Ben Gurion, first prime minister of Israel, to the General Staff, May 1948
Zionists and Israelis have long employed terrorism as a tool and a tactic. Senior officials of the Israeli government, the Mossad, and AMAN (Israeli military intelligence) have long histories of using terror as a tool. Zionist immigrants from Poland and Russia used terrorism to drive the native Palestinians from their land, homes, and villages during the war of 1947-48. Some 400 Palestinian villages and towns were obliterated and their populations killed or sent into exile as refugees. Many of the Palestinian houses and villages were taken over by Jewish immigrants; others were razed to the ground.

The Zionists also began using terrorism as a tactic against the West in the 1940s, carrying out false-flag terror attacks against the United States and Britain as far back as the bombing of Jerusalem's King David Hotel on July 22, 1946. The bombing of the luxury hotel was ordered by Menachem Begin, the head of the Irgun, a Zionist terrorist organization during the 1930s and 1940s. Begin, a terrorist and avowed racist, later became prime minister of Israel, a position he held during the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which was led by Ariel Sharon, then minister of defense. Begin had a Jewish supremacist view of the world, which he used to justify his crimes of terrorism and genocide. "[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs," Begin, then Prime Minister Begin, said in a speech to the Knesset, as quoted by the Israeli writer Amnon Kapeliouk in his article "Begin and the Beasts" published in the


Menachem Begin, the Polish-born head of the terrorist gang Irgun, and the King David Hotel he ordered bombed in 1946. "Everything was coordinated with the Haganah," Prime Minister Begin later told the Israel Broadcasting Authority.

Irgun and Haganah terrorists, disguised as Arabs, set off seven large demolition bombs in the basement of the King David Hotel, which was the base for the British Secretariat and the military command in British-occupied Palestine. Ninety-one people were killed, most of them staff of the secretariat. The attack on the hotel was the deadliest attack against the British in the history of the Mandate. To this day, the Zionist bombing of the King David Hotel is the terrorist act which has caused the greatest number of casualties in the history of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Zionist extremists, however, are proud of the terrorist bombing as one of their actions that compelled the British to give up the Mandate over Palestine.

David Ben Gurion, the head of the Haganah militia who advocated the use of terror as a tool, supported the bombing. Although the Haganah publicly condemned the bombing afterwards, many researchers insist that the Haganah directly authorized the bombing. "Everything was coordinated with the Haganah," former prime minister and Irgun leader Menachem Begin declared in a film clip from the Israel Broadcasting Authority's "Scroll of Fire" series.


"We must use terror," Israel's first prime minister David Ben Gurion (left) told the General Staff in 1948. Ben Gurion (a.k.a. David Grün), the Polish-born leader of the Haganah, authorized the terror bombing of the King David Hotel. Ben Gurion, who developed Zionist terrorism as a tool to coerce the Palestinians and the West, with his junior partners in terror, Shimon Peres (right) and Moshe Dayan.

NETANYAHU'S SUPPORT FOR TERRORISTS

Members of the Irgun, which carried out scores of terror bombings in the 1930s and 40s (and its political successors in the Likud party) hold the world view that "political violence and terrorism" are "legitimate tools in the Jewish national struggle for the Land of Israel," according to Arie Perliger and Leonard Weinberg, authors of "Jewish Self Defense and Terrorist Groups Prior to the Establishment of the State of Israel: Roots and Traditions."

In July 2006, the former prime minister and leader of the Likud, Benjamin Netanyahu, attended a two-day 60th anniversary celebration of the King David Hotel bombing with former terrorists of the Irgun and Haganah. The event was organized by the Menachem Begin Heritage House, the University of Haifa, and the Association of IZL [Irgun] Fighters. The seminar was held "to mark the 60th anniversary of the bombing of the King David Hotel, Jerusalem, by members of the United Resistance Movement (Haganah and Irgun)," the Jerusalem Post noted in its pre-event notices. The Israeli newspaper specifically noted that members of the Haganah and Irgun had been involved in the terrorist bombing.

One of the terrorists even led a tour of the hotel he had bombed. The fact that the American-educated right-wing politician and terror specialist, "Bibi" Netanyahu, had participated in a two-day event celebrating the bombing of the King David Hotel was reported in the Jerusalem Post, and in leading newspapers in Britain, France, and India – but not a single word about the event was printed in the controlled press of the United States, the nation supposedly fighting a "War on Terror."


"It's very good," said Benjamin Netanyahu on 9-11 about the attacks which were thought to have killed more than 10,000 Americans.

Netanyahu's conspicuous role as the main speaker at an event celebrating an act of terrorism was not reported in any U.S. newspaper until Patrick Buchanan mentioned it in his article entitled "Moral Culpability for Qana," on August 2, 2006. Buchanan's comments, however, appeared only in independent regional newspapers in Pittsburgh, Wyoming, and Ohio:
Rubbing our noses in our own cravenness, "Bibi" Netanyahu took time out a week ago to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the terror attack on the King David Hotel by Menachem Begin's Irgun, an attack that killed 92 people, among them British nurses. This was not a terrorist act, Bibi explained, because Irgun telephoned a 15-minute warning to the hotel before the bombs went off.

Right. And those children in Qana should not have ignored Israeli leaflets warning them to clear out of southern Lebanon.

Our Israeli friends appear to be playing us for fools.
"TERRORISTS IN DISGUISE"

In 1946, The Times (U.K.) described the Irgun as "terrorists in disguise." Sarah Agassi, 80, was one of the "terrorists in disguise" involved in the bombing of the King David Hotel, it reported. She and a fellow agent had cased out the hotel. Her brother and other terrorists had disguised themselves as Arabs delivering milk and brought seven milk cans, each containing 50 kg. (110 lbs.) of explosives, into the basement of the hotel.

There were important strategic reasons for the bombing, according to the Jerusalem Post of July 27, 2006:
The bombing was a direct response to the events of the British Operation Agatha and the Black Sabbath of June 29, 1946, during which 17,000 British soldiers confiscated weapons and intelligence documents and arrested thousands of leaders of the Yishuv and Hagana activists.

The documents, brought to the King David headquarters, revealed most of the Yishuv's operational plans and incriminated the Jewish Agency in the leadership of the United Resistance, as well as the IZL and the Lehi, against the British.

The evidence would be used to try the Jewish activists and, quite possibly, to hang them.

Twenty-five fighters took part in the carefully-planned and precisely executed bombing. Six of them, dressed as Arab laborers, placed the seven milk cans filled with 350 kg. of explosives, fitted with timers set to go off in 40 minutes, around the central support beam of the hotel's southern wing. Others spread explosives along the roads leading to the hotel to prevent reinforcements and emergency medical crews from arriving at the scene.
NETANYAHU'S TERRORIST ROOTS

Netanyahu is the son of Ben Zion Netanyahu (born Mileikowsky in Warsaw, Poland). Ben Zion was the former senior aide of Vladimir "Ze'ev" Jabotinsky, the militant extremist founder of Revisionist Zionism and the Irgun. His son, Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu is also a leading advocate of the teachings of Jabotinsky. On July 8, 2007, Netanyahu was the keynote speaker at an event at the Jabotinsky Institute to mark the 67th anniversary of the death of the founder of the Irgun.

The Irgun, a Zionist terrorist organization dedicated to creating Greater Israel, is the political parent of Israel's extreme right-wing Likud party, which Benjamin Netanyahu currently heads. The Irgun was the "armed expression" of Revisionist Zionism, which was expressed by Jabotinsky as follows, according to Howard M. Sachar, author of A History of Israel from the Rise of Zionism to Our Time:
1. Every Jew has the right to enter Palestine;

2. Only active retaliation [i.e. terrorism] would deter the Arabs and the British;

3. Only Jewish armed force would ensure the Jewish state.
TERRORISM SPECIALIST

Netanyahu is also a terrorism specialist who has made a career out of promoting the Zionist agenda of a global "War on Terror" since the early 1980s.

On September 11, 2001, the New York Times asked Netanyahu what he thought of the attacks: "It's very good," Netanyahu said. Who else, but a hardened terrorist involved in the crime, would use the word "good" to describe 9-11?

As James Bennet of the New York Times reported on September 12, 2001:
Asked tonight what the attack meant for relations between the United States and Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied, "It's very good." Then he edited himself: "Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy."
In 2006, the Jerusalem Post and other newspapers reported on Netanyahu's outspoken support for the terrorists who had bombed the King David Hotel in 1946. The Irgun's chief of operations at the time of the bombing was Eitan Livni, the father of the Israeli Foreign Minister "Tzipi" Livni (2006-09). The high-level political connections in Israel with the Irgun terrorists of the 1940s are an indication of the degree of terrorist influence on the Israeli political establishment, The Hindu [India] wisely noted in an article entitled "Celebrating Terror, Israeli-style" on July 24, 2006:
"We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated," Britain's Ambassador to Israel, Simon McDonald, and its consul-general in Jerusalem, John Jenkins, protested weakly in a letter to the local Israeli administration in Jerusalem.
PREVIOUS ISRAELI ATTACKS ON U.S. TARGETS

Eight years after the bombing of the King David Hotel, the State of Israel carried out a series of false-flag terror bombings against U.S. and British libraries, theatres, and other government institutions in Egypt in a terror campaign designed to be blamed on Egyptian groups. This Israeli terror campaign of July 1954 is often referred to as the "Lavon Affair" after Pinhas Lavon, the Israeli defense minister at the time.

In June 1967, thirteen years after the Lavon Affair, the Israeli air force and navy deliberately strafed, bombed, napalmed, and torpedoed an unarmed U.S. vessel, the USS Liberty, and tried to kill all of the nearly three hundred crew members, simply to achieve a strategic war-time goal. Recently released documents from the National Security Agency (NSA) confirm that the United States government at the time had evidence that the Israelis had deliberately attacked the USS Liberty knowing it was a U.S. vessel. Oliver Kirby, the NSA's deputy director for operations at the time of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, confirmed the existence of the transcripts to John Crewdson of the Chicago Tribune, saying he had personally read them:
Asked whether he had personally read such transcripts, Kirby replied, "I sure did. I certainly did."

"They said, 'We've got him in the zero,'" Kirby recalled, "whatever that meant -- I guess the sights or something. And then one of them said, 'Can you see the flag?'

They said 'Yes, it's U.S, it's U.S.' They said it several times, so there wasn't any doubt in anybody's mind that they knew it."

Kirby, now 86 and retired in Texas, said the transcripts were "something that's bothered me all my life. I'm willing to swear on a stack of Bibles that we knew they knew."
MORDECHAI FEIN (a.k.a. MOTI HOD)

The Israeli planes involved in the attack reported directly to the commander of the air force, Major General Mordechai Hod. Hod (a.k.a. Mordechai Fein or "Moti" Hod) was the Commander of the Israeli Air Force during the 1967 Six-Day War. Hod was from Kibbutz Degania, like Moshe Dayan, the defense minister he served under.


Major General Mordechai "Moti" Hod, IAF Commander (1966-1973)

Hod left the military in 1975 and created CAL, an Israel air cargo company. Oddly, after only two years he left the company he started and became chief executive of El Al airlines from 1977 to 1979. In 1985, he founded an un-named security company, according to his obituary in the Guardian (UK) from June 2003. From 1987 until retirement in 1993, he was the chairman of Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI).

ICTS, the Israeli airport passenger screening and security firm, is a key defendant in the 9-11 litigation. The ICTS website says this about the company: "ICTS International N.V. was founded in 1982 by a select group of security experts, former military commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and security agencies."

An employee of ICTS told me in 2001 that Huntleigh USA, their wholly owned airport security subsidiary, had handled passenger screening at Boston and Newark airports on 9-11. As a matter of fact, the Mossad-owned company probably had people at every airport involved in any way on 9-11. The ICTS company website says as much: "In 1998, ICTS International N.V. made a strategic decision to focus on the US market. The following year, it acquired Huntleigh USA Corp., which provides airline passenger screening services at 47 US airports, including all the international aviation gateways in the USA."

The ICTS company developed out of El Al (the Israeli-state airlines) security. The Israeli airline security firm went through a number of name changes as it began providing "security" to European and American airports.

Moshe Dayan, defense minister during the Six-Day War, was a close associate and political ally of Shimon Peres. In 1965, former prime minister Ben Gurion and his closest followers, including Shimon Peres and Moshe Dayan, broke away from the ruling labor party, Mapai, and formed a separate minority faction, the Rafi or Workers' List.

COVER-UP

The U.S. government, military, and media all went along with the cover-up of the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty to avoid blaming Israel for the murder of 34 American servicemen, 26 of whom died from the torpedo blast, and the wounding of some 173 others. Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, certainly knows who made the decision to attack the U.S. vessel in 1967.

The Main Battle Dressing Station on the USS Liberty was described as a “bloody scene reminiscent of the American Civil War.” The Israeli torpedo and machine guns took a terrible toll on the Liberty’s crew, killing 34 and wounding 172.

The Crewdson article reveals that the Israelis knew very well that the USS Liberty was an American vessel in international waters – before they fired the torpedo that killed twenty-six U.S. servicemen in one fell swoop:
Twenty minutes later, after the Liberty had been hit repeatedly by machine guns, 30 mm cannon and napalm from the Israelis' French-built Mirage and Mystere fighter-bombers, the controller directing the attack asked his chief in Tel Aviv to which country the target vessel belonged.

"Apparently American," the chief controller replied.

Fourteen minutes later the Liberty was struck amidships by a torpedo from an Israeli boat, killing 26 of the 100 or so NSA technicians and specialists in Russian and Arabic who were working in restricted compartments below the ship's waterline.

The Israeli torpedo killed 26 U.S. servicemen and left a hole 39 feet across.

"SINK THE TARGET – NO SURVIVORS"

Lt. James M. Ennes, Jr., an officer on the bridge of the USS Liberty, wrote his first-hand account of the Israeli attack in a 1979 book entitled Assault on the Liberty. Lieutenant Ennes' book is documentary evidence that the Israeli attack was deliberate and not an accident of war. Ennes describes how Israeli torpedo boats repeatedly machine-gunned Liberty sailors fighting the napalm fires on deck and shot her life rafts in the water while an oversize U.S. flag flew from its mast.

The shooting of the life rafts indicates that the Israelis did not want anyone to survive the assault and intended sinking of the U.S. vessel. Steve Forslund, an intelligence analyst for the 544th Air Reconnaissance Technical Wing in 1967, saw the transcripts from the Israeli pilots and their ground control as they came off the teletype machine at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha.

"The ground control station stated that the target was American and for the aircraft to confirm it," Forslund recalled. "The aircraft did confirm the identity of the target as American, by the American flag. The ground control station ordered the aircraft to attack and sink the target and ensure they left no survivors." Forslund said he clearly recalled "the obvious frustration of the controller over the inability of the pilots to sink the target quickly and completely."

"He kept insisting the mission had to sink the target, and was frustrated with the pilots' responses that it didn't sink."

Chief Petty Officer Stanley W. White, president of the Liberty Veterans Association, said, "The Israeli planes and gunboats spent more than one hour hitting us with rockets, napalm bombs, torpedoes, cannon and machine-gun fire. They machine-gunned our firefighters on deck and they shot our life rafts out of the water…I don't know of a single member of our association who believes that attack was an accident."

There are three reasons that have been given as to why the Israelis wanted to sink the U.S. electronic reconnaissance vessel:
1. To prevent the U.S. from knowing that Israel was planning to seize the Golan Heights from Syria;

2. To prevent the U.S. from obtaining evidence that Israeli troops were slaughtering some 1,000 Egyptian prisoners of war near Gaza;

3. To destroy the U.S. vessel that was capable of discerning that Israel was sending false communications to Jordan and Egypt to keep them in the war until the Israeli military achieved its territorial goals on the ground.
"U.S. intelligence documents indicate the Israelis attacked the Liberty deliberately. They feared she would monitor their plans to attack the Golan Heights in Syria - a move the United States opposed for fear of provoking Soviet military intervention," James Ennes said.

Wilber Crane Eveland, an author formerly with the CIA in the Middle East, wrote that the Liberty had intercepted messages that "made it clear that Israel had never intended to limit its attack to Egypt."

ISRAELI MASSACRE OF EGYPTIAN POWS

The Tribune article reported that the NSA's deputy director at the time, Louis Tordella, speculated in a recently declassified memo that the attack "might have been ordered by some senior commander on the Sinai peninsula who wrongly suspected that the Liberty was monitoring his activities." The activities that needed to be hidden included the slaughter of some 1,000 Egyptian POWs.

Aryeh Yitzhaki of Bar Ilan University, who had worked in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) history department, said in an August 1995 interview with Israel Radio that a reconnaissance unit, known as Shaked (Almond), headed by Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, had killed hundreds of Egyptians who had abandoned their weapons and fled into the desert during the 1967 war.

Yitzhaki said he had investigated six or seven separate incidents, in which approximately 1,000 unarmed Egyptian prisoners of war had been killed by IDF units.

THE BOMBING OF THE U.S. MARINE BARRACKS - BEIRUT 1983

Sixteen years later, 241 U.S. Marines died when a Mercedes truck packed with explosives demolished their barracks at Beirut International Airport on October 23, 1983. A similar explosion occurred nearly simultaneously at the French military barracks a few kilometers away, killing 56 French troops.

In the wake of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, President Ronald Reagan sent 1,800 marines to Beirut to act as "peace keepers." Ariel Sharon and the Israeli leadership, however, resented the interference and used the U.S. presence to commit a false-flag operation that killed 241 marines, according to Victor Ostrovsky in his book on the Mossad, By Way of Deception.

Ostrovsky, a former Mossad officer, reported that Nahum Admoni, the Mossad director at the time, had very specific information about the truck being prepared for the attack on the U.S. Marines, but had intentionally withheld this crucial information from the U.S. military. "No, we're not there to protect Americans. They're a big country. Send only the regular information," Admoni reportedly said.

Admoni, the son of Polish immigrants, was director of the Mossad from 1982 to 1989. In 1947-48, Admoni had served in the Shai, the Haganah intelligence branch headed by Isser Harel, and later in the newly created IDF Intelligence, Aman. After the 1948 war, Admoni studied at the University of California, Berkeley, until 1954.

The purpose of the false flag terror bombings in Lebanon was to create U.S. animosity toward the Arab world and align the U.S. with Israel, according to Ostrovsky. There had been an earlier car bomb at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut on April 18, 1983, which had killed seventeen Marines. The bombing compelled the Marines to move offshore and President Reagan ordered them to be withdrawn from Lebanon on February 7, 1984.

The Beirut bombing was the deadliest single-day death toll for the United States Marine Corps since the Battle of Iwo Jima. Israeli intelligence is suspected of having been involved in the bombings in Lebanon.

"WAR ON TERROR"

The ultimate goal of creating U.S. animosity toward the Arab world is the Zionist mega-fraud known as the "War on Terror." With its U.S.-led invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, the "War on Terror" is the realization of an important strategic goal for Israeli military planners.

To have the armies of the U.S. and European nations occupying Iraq, the most powerful and advanced Arab nation, has always been the dream of Zionist strategic planners. Benjamin Netanyahu, for example, has explicitly called for such a global "War on Terror" since the early 1980s.

Although it is never mentioned as such in the controlled press, it needs to be understood that the "War on Terror" with its pre-planned invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, constitutes a war of aggression. To prepare for and carry out a war of aggression is a serious war crime, i.e. a Crime against Peace under the Nuremberg Principles of 1950. The United States and its allies convicted and literally strangled to death dozens of senior Nazis at the Nuremberg trials for having committed such war crimes.

In the aftermath of 9-11, the U.S. government failed to prove that the terror attacks had been planned, sponsored, or executed by members of the ruling Taliban regime prior to invading Afghanistan. Years after invading that nation, the U.S. government has yet to prove that any link existed between the Taliban regime and 9-11.

On June 5, 2006, author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 1998 bombings of US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, the "most wanted" poster does not indicate that Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the events of 9-11. Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, “The reason why 9-11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9-11.” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9-11.”

Likewise, there is no evidence of involvement in 9-11 by any member of the regime of the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, allegations that the Iraqi regime had obtained weapons of mass destruction, trumpeted by senior officials of the Bush administration and Judith Miller of the New York Times, turned out to be lies crafted solely for the purpose of deceiving the public and provoking another illegal invasion. The passage of time does not make a war of aggression any less criminal.

DECADES OF PLANNING

There are key people involved in the 1954 Israeli terror bombings of the U.S. Information Agency libraries in Alexandria and Cairo who held high-level positions in the Israeli government of 2001. There are other Israelis, with long histories of terrorism and strategic planning, who revealed having very specific prior knowledge of 9-11 long before 2001.

The highest Israeli intelligence official at the time of the Lavon Affair, Isser Harel, was evidently aware of the long-term planning of 9-11 -- more than twenty years before it happened. In 1980, twenty-one years before September 11, 2001, Isser Harel, the former director of Haganah intelligence, the Shin Bet (internal) and the Mossad (foreign) intelligence services, predicted with uncanny accuracy the events of 9-11 to Michael D. Evans, an American supporter of Zionist extremists of the Jabotinsky sort.

On September 23, 1980, Evans visited Harel at his home in Israel and had dinner with him and Dr. Reuven Hecht, a senior adviser to then prime minister Menachem Begin.


Isser Harel, Israeli spymaster and master terrorist, discussed his knowledge of the plan to bomb the WTC -- in 1980.


"AMERICA THE TARGET"

In an editorial entitled "America the Target," published in the Jerusalem Post of September 30, 2001, Evans related what Harel had told him:
I sat with former Mossad chief Isser Harel for a conversation about Arab terrorism. As he handed me a cup of hot tea and a plate of cookies, I asked him, "Do you think terrorism will come to America, and if so, where and why?"

Harel looked at his American visitor and replied, "I fear it will come to you in America. America has the power, but not the will, to fight terrorism. The terrorists have the will, but not the power, to fight America - but all that could change with time. Arab oil money buys more than tents."

As to the where, Harel continued, "New York City is the symbol of freedom and capitalism. It's likely they will strike the Empire State Building, your tallest building [he mistakenly thought] and a symbol of your power."
In another article, entitled "Jimmy Carter: Radical Islam's Ally," Evans related the same story about Harel:
My last question was would terrorism ever come to America. “You have the power to fight it,” he said, “but not the will. They have the will, but not the power. All of that will change in time. Yes, I fear it will come to New York and your tallest building, which is a symbol of your fertility.”

Michael D. Evans is a Zionist Jew who portrays himself as a Christian missionary. Here Evans meets with Menachem Begin, the former terrorist head of the Irgun who ordered the bombing of the King David Hotel. Evans was told by Isser Harel of the Israeli plan to bomb the World Trade Center in 1980, about the time of this photo.

In 2004, Evans published a book entitled The American Prophecies, Terrorism and Mid-East Conflict Reveal a Nation’s Destiny. In a subsequent interview, published under the title "Is America in Bible Prophecy?" with Deborah Caldwell, Evans explains what Harel meant about fertility symbols:
Caldwell: So extrapolating from the scenarios of the Bible, what do you believe is our nation's future, based on prophecy?

Evans: The story of prophecy that has to do with the Jews goes all the way through to the end of the Book of Revelation. Jesus prophesied in Matthew 24. The disciples said, "What shall be the signs of the coming of the end of the age?" And he said, "The first sign would be deception." Now, there's never been greater deception then what happened on September 11, 2001.

Caldwell: Why do you say that America's story is contained within biblical prophecies?

Evans: America stepped into the eye of a prophetic storm when it took covenant with both Ishmael and Isaac, the sons of Abraham, the Arab and the Jew…Most of the Bible talks about this battle between these two brothers, and we're right in the middle of that.

On Sept. 23, 1979, the founder of Israeli intelligence over dinner told me that America was developing a tolerance for terror. The gentleman's name was Isser Harel, the founder of Mossad Israeli intelligence -- he ran it from 1947 to 1963.

He told me that America had developed an alliance between two countries, Israel and Saudi Arabia, and that the alliance with Saudi Arabia was dangerous and would develop a tolerance for terror among Americans. He said if the tolerance continued that Islamic fundamentalists would ultimately strike America.

I said "Where?"

He said, "In Islamic theology, the phallic symbol is very important. Your biggest phallic symbol is New York City and your tallest building will be the phallic symbol they will hit." Isser Harel prophesied that the tallest building in New York would be the first building hit by Islamic fundamentalists 21 years ago.

Mike Evans with Ehud Olmert, the Likud (Irgunist) mayor of Jerusalem, who made a secret and undisclosed visit to New York City - on the very day before 9-11

The "Is America in Bible Prophecy?" interview with Evans is published on-line on Beliefnet, a Zionist propaganda network disguised as a religious website. Steven Waldman is CEO, Co-Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Beliefnet. Previously, Waldman was National Editor of US News & World Report, National Correspondent for Newsweek and editor of the Washington Monthly. One of Beliefnet's directors is Michael S. Perlis, the former President of the Playboy Publishing Group.

Think about this for a minute. The founder of Israeli intelligence tells an American Zionist in 1980 that Arab terrorism will come to America and that the terrorists will strike the tallest building in New York City. His bizarre prediction, which makes no sense, then comes to pass thirteen years later with a hapless and thoroughly fake attack in 1993, evidently set up by the FBI. The FBI-coordinated false-flag terror event is followed, eight years later, by a spectacular, well-planned, and extremely lethal attack which kills thousands. How did Isser Harel know what the Arab terrorists had planned more than two decades before 9-11?

ISSER HAREL – MOSSAD'S MASTER TERRORIST

Under David Ben Gurion, Isser Harel was the former chief of Haganah intelligence (Shai) from 1944, the Shin Bet from 1948, and the Mossad until 1963. Admoni, the Mossad director who refused to warn the U.S. Marines in 1983, had served under Harel. Given his unique position and penchant for terrorism as a means of coercion, the uncanny accuracy of Harel's prediction says more about the years of Israeli planning that went into 9-11 than it does about any criminal plots of alleged Arab origin.

After nearly two decades as the head of Israeli intelligence, Ben Gurion reportedly asked Harel to resign in 1963 because of his use of terrorism bombings as a means of coercion against the West. Harel, as director of the Mossad, had initiated "The Damocles Operation" of the early 1960s, which was a terror bombing campaign to threaten German scientists to prevent them from helping Egypt develop its defense systems.


Isser Harel, head of Israeli intelligence in 1961

Two Mossad agents were arrested and jailed in Switzerland for using terror bombs against German scientists. The wife of one scientist was killed in a mysterious explosion, a second scientist disappeared, and the secretary of a third scientist was blinded and mutilated by a mail bomb in Cairo. As Ian Black and Benny Morris, authors of Israel's Secret Wars: A History of Israel's Intelligence Services, wrote:
Dr. Heinz Krug, director of a Munich-based Egyptian front company called Intra, had disappeared mysteriously and was presumed murdered in September 1962.

On 7 October Harel [Isser Harel, Mossad head] left for Europe 'to personally supervise authorized operations and the special collection programme.'

In November, Aman [IDF intelligence] sent several letter bombs to the rocket installations in Egypt and one of them, a large parcel that had been mailed by sea from Hamburg, killed five Egyptians. Someone with a black sense of humour dubbed the campaign 'post mortem.'
It is interesting to note that Yosef Goell, a columnist with the Jerusalem Post, published an editorial entitled "Isser Harel and the German Scientists" on February 22, 1991, in which Israel's English-language newspaper delivered a thinly-veiled threat of Harel-type terrorism to European scientists and companies doing business with Arab nations:
The directors and managers of those firms and the experts who work for them should be reminded that they are playing with their lives and the welfare of their families. It would be well if they went back and studied the episode of Isser Harel and the German scientists in Nasser's missile program of the 1960s.
THE LAVON AFFAIR

The Lavon Affair, or "the shameful affair" (Esek Habish) as it is known in Hebrew, was an Israeli false-flag terror bombing campaign against the United States and Britain that was carried out in Egypt in 1954. Israeli military intelligence had set up a terror cell of sleeper agents in Egypt, which was activated in July 1954 to blow up U.S. and British targets. The Israeli operation was code-named "Susannah." The false-flag terrorist bombings were meant to be blamed on Egyptians in order to alienate the U.S. and Britain from President Gamal Abdul Nasser and prevent Egypt from nationalizing the Suez Canal.

The Lavon Affair is seldom discussed in the media or in university courses on Middle Eastern history. Strict censorship in the Israeli media even prevented the Israeli public from knowing about the affair for many years. Only in 2005, fifty-one years after the bombings, did Israel finally admit responsibility for its 1954 false-flag terrorist bombing campaign in Egypt. The false-flag terror bombings were carried out between July 2 and July 27, 1954 by a covert terror cell composed of about one dozen Egyptian Jews under the command of Israeli intelligence agents.

The Israeli-run terror cell was discovered and broken up on July 27, 1954, when one of its members was caught in Alexandria after the bomb he was carrying exploded. An Israeli terrorist cell, Unit 131, was reportedly responsible for the terror bombings. At the time of the incident, Unit 131 is said to have been the subject of a dispute between Aman and Mossad over who controlled it. How convenient.

The Egyptian operatives had been recruited several years before, when an Israeli intelligence officer named Avram Dar went to Cairo posing as John Darling, a British citizen from Gibraltar. Dar recruited Egyptian Jews, who had helped the Mossad with illegal emigration to Israel, and trained them for covert operations. The Israeli terror cell went to work in the summer of 1954. On July 2, a post office in Alexandria was firebombed. On July 14, the U.S. Information Agency libraries in Alexandria and Cairo and a British theater were bombed. The bombs contained nitroglycerine and were placed on the shelves of the libraries. After the terrorist cell was discovered, three of the Israeli terrorist commanders succeeded in fleeing Egypt and the fourth committed suicide. After the trial in Cairo, two of the accused Egyptian Jews were condemned to death and executed, and eight were condemned to long terms of imprisonment.

MOSHE SHARETT

The Israeli prime minister and foreign minister at the time, Moshe Sharett, was evidently unaware of the intrigue, which had apparently been carried out by disciples of David Ben Gurion, namely Isser Harel, Moshe Dayan, and Shimon Peres.

Sharett (born Shertok in Cherson, Ukraine) was Israel's first foreign minister (May 15, 1948 – June 18, 1956) and second prime minister (Dec. 7, 1953 – Nov. 2, 1955). Sharett held both positions at the time of the Israeli terror campaign. Sharett, who appears to have known nothing about the terror ring, only became informed of the facts afterwards.

In October 1953, shortly before Ben Gurion took a two-year hiatus in the Negev Desert leaving Sharett in charge, he appointed Pinhas Lavon, a staunch supporter of the "retaliation" [i.e. terrorism] policy, as minister of defense, and nominated Moshe Dayan as chief of staff of the armed forces. When Sharett was told of Ben Gurion's decision to nominate Dayan as chief of staff, he penned this note in his diary: "The new chief of staff's immense capacity for plotting and intrigue-making will yield many complications."

LAVON - TERRORIZE THE WEST

Pinhas Lavon, Israel's minister of defense at the time of the terror bombings, was part of a group of military leaders who advocated the use of terrorism against the Western nations, particularly Britain and the United States. This group included the Polish-born immigrants David Ben Gurion and Shimon Peres (Szymon Persky), and Moshe Dayan, the kibbutznik son of Ukrainian immigrants.

In January 1955, Sharett wrote about Lavon to Aharon Barkatt, secretary general of the Mapai party:
He [Lavon] inspired and cultivated the negative adventuristic trend in the army and preached the doctrine that not the Arab countries but the Western Powers are the enemy, and the only way to deter them from their plots is through direct actions that will terrorize them.
When the Israeli terrorist plot against Britain and the U.S. was exposed, Ben Gurion blamed Lavon, who, in turn, blamed Col. Benjamin Givli, another Ben Gurion protégé and the head of Aman, Israeli military intelligence. Lavon said that Givli had organized the covert operation behind his back.

SHARETT & ISRAEL'S TERRORISM

Prime Minister Sharett, however, had "no doubts about the guilt of the Dayan-Peres-Givli clique," according to the late Israeli historian Livia Rokach, the daughter of Israel Rokach, the former mayor of Tel Aviv and minister of internal affairs in the Sharett government:
For him [Sharett], the question of who gave the order was secondary to the necessity of pronouncing a judgment on the ideology and politics of Israel's terrorism. Therefore, while he had no doubts about the guilt of the Dayan-Peres-Givli clique; to him Lavon's political responsibility was also inescapable.
As Sharett wrote about Lavon on January 10, 1955:
[People] ask me if I am convinced that "he gave the order?"… but let us assume that Givli has acted without instructions… doesn't the moral responsibility lie all the same on Lavon, who has constantly preached for acts of madness and taught the army leadership the diabolic lesson of how to set the Middle East on fire, how to cause friction, cause bloody confrontations, sabotage targets and property of the Powers [and perform] acts of despair and suicide?"
As a "moderate Zionist," Sharett believed that Israel's survival would be impossible without the support of the West, Rokach wrote, but that Western "morality" and interests in the Middle East would not support a Jewish state which "behaves according to the laws of the jungle" and "raises terrorism to the level of a sacred principle."

SHIMON PERES: "FRIGHTEN THE WEST"

In May 1947, Ben Gurion drafted Shimon Peres into the Haganah high command, where he was initially put in charge of manpower and later became involved in arms procurement and production. Peres served as chief of the naval department in 1948 and was sent to the United States in 1950 on an arms procurement mission. Peres was instrumental in acquiring weapons for the Haganah and establishing the Israeli defense industries, especially the aircraft and avionics industries, according to his biography. He is also known as the godfather of the Israel's high-tech defense industries and illegal nuclear arsenal.

Peres built an alliance with France that secured a source of arms, and was responsible for the program to develop nuclear weapons for Israel, convincing the French to help Israel build a secret nuclear reactor at Dimona in the Negev Desert in 1957. It was Peres who acquired the French advanced Dassault Mirage III jet fighters that the Israeli air force used to attack the USS Liberty in 1967.

About Shimon Peres, whom Sharett considered to be one of the key planners of the terror bombing campaign of U.S. institutions in Egypt, he wrote this note in 1955: "Peres shares the same ideology [as Lavon]: he wants to frighten the West into supporting Israel's aims."

Two years later, in 1957, Sharett wrote even more critically about Peres:
I have stated that I totally and utterly reject Peres and consider his rise to prominence a malignant, immoral disgrace. I will rend my clothes in mourning for the State if I see him become a minister in the Israeli government
.


Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Olmert, Ariel Sharon, and Shimon Peres – the senior architects of Israeli terrorism

Sharett's terrorist adversaries: Ben Gurion, Dayan, and Peres, however, prevailed and dealt "a crushing blow" to "the very hypothesis of moderate Zionism," Rokach concluded:
In the final analysis the West, and in particular the U.S., let itself be frightened, or blackmailed, into supporting Israel's megalomaniac ambitions, because an objective relationship of complicity already existed and because once pushed into the open this complicity proved capable of serving the cause of Western power politics in the region.
The immense profits that have flowed into the coffers of Western drug and oil cartels as a consequence of the Anglo-American control over the opium production of occupied Afghanistan and the oil of occupied Iraq amply illustrate Rokach's point that Israeli false-flag terror is "capable of serving the cause of Western power politics in the region."

As Rokach concluded in her study of Sharett's diary and documents:
Just as Zionism, based on the de-Palestinization and the Judaisation of Palestine, was intrinsically racist and immoral, thus the West, in reality, had no use for a Jewish state in the Middle East which did not behave according to the laws of the jungle, and whose terrorism could not be relied on as a major instrument for the oppression of the peoples of the region.
By April 1957, Sharett realized that the hard-line terrorist faction headed by Ben Gurion and his protégés Dayan and Peres had won – and that he, and his vision of moderate Zionism, had lost:
I go on repeating to myself nowadays, "Admit that you are the loser!" They showed much more daring and dynamism…they played with fire, and they won…The public, even your own public, does not share your position. On the contrary…the public now turns even against its "masters" and its bitterness against the retreat [from Sinai and Gaza] is developing into a tendency to change the political balance in this country in favor of [the former Irgun terrorist leader Menachem] Begin.
"His [Sharett's] defeat in internal Israeli politics reflected the ascendancy of the positions of Ben Gurion, Dayan and others [Peres] who were not reluctant to use force to attain their goals," Noam Chomsky wrote in his forward to Rokach's book:
His diaries give a very revealing picture of the developing conflict, as he perceived it, and offer an illuminating insight into the early history of the state of Israel, with ramifications that reach to the present, and beyond.
9-11 and the "War on Terror" are clearly two "ramifications" of the victory of the terrorist Zionists that "reach to the present."

Had Moshe Sharett, the Israeli prime minister, "spoken frankly and directly to public opinion" and torn up "the mask of secrecy" surrounding the Israeli terror bombings, he could have changed the history of the Middle East, Rokach wrote:
At this point, Sharett could have changed the history of the Middle East had he spoken frankly and directly to public opinion, which was deeply troubled by the events in Egypt: the arrests, the trial, the executions, the contradicting rumors, the climate of intrigue surrounding the "Affair." [By] tearing up the mask of secrecy, denouncing those who were responsible, exposing his true convictions in regard to Israel's terroristic ideologies and orientations, [and] proposing an alternative, he could have created for himself the conditions in which to use the formal powers that he possessed to make a radical housecleaning in the security establishment. The impact of such an act would have probably been considerable not only in Israel itself but also in the Arab world, especially in Egypt. The downfall of Lavon on one hand and of the Ben Gurionist gang, headed by Dayan and Peres, on the other hand might have blocked Ben Gurion's return to power, and in the longer range, the Sinai-Suez war. Events since then would have taken a different course.
Unfortunately, "the Ben Gurionist gang, headed by Dayan and Peres" came to power. Peres, who had served in high-level appointed positions, was elected to the Knesset in the 1959 elections. Peres, the former Director General of the Ministry of Defense under Moshe Dayan, then became the Deputy Defense Minister, a position he held until 1965 when he was implicated, with Dayan, in the Lavon affair.

On June 5, 1967, Israel started the Six-Day War when it launched a pre-emptive attack against Egypt and its air force. Yitzhak Rabin was chief of staff and Moshe Dayan was minister of defense during this crucial war that reshaped the Middle East.

Ben Gurion and his gang of Dayan and Peres formed a new party in 1965, Rafi, partly due to their involvement in the Lavon Affair. Dayan and Peres had worked closely together since their days in the Haganah.

SHIMON PERES: TERRORIST-IN-CHIEF

Shimon Peres, a most unsuitable recipient of the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize, has a long history of terrorism, which is evidently not well known in the West. Peres, the octogenarian president of the State of Israel, has a documented record of involvement in terrorist crimes over a period of more than five decades.


Condoleezza Rice visits Shimon Peres, September 2007

Peres is a survivor of the struggle among Zionists between the militant hard-liners, who promoted the use of violence and terrorism, versus the softer "moderates," who opposed terrorism and advocated the use of diplomacy. Shimon Peres is a hard-liner. Born Szymon Persky in Wiszniew, Poland, on August 2, 1923, Peres is the first cousin of Lauren Bacall, the Brooklyn-born Betty Joan Persky. This relationship between the veteran hard-line Zionist and a Hollywood movie star is a good example of how Zionist Jewish families from the Pale of Settlement often established branches in Israel and the United States in the early 1900s.

In 1947, the Polish-born Zionist leader David Ben Gurion (born David Grün) met Shimon Peres, then age twenty-three, at Haganah headquarters and made him responsible for manpower and arms purchases for the underground Zionist militia Ben Gurion commanded in Palestine.


Ben Gurion and Shimon Peres (on left), 1969

Peres became a protégé of Ben Gurion. After the bombing of the King David Hotel and other terror killings by the Haganah and other Zionist terror gangs, the British withdrew from Palestine. The armed gangs of Zionist immigrants and veterans of the Red Army then turned their terrorist skills, which some had gained during World War II, against the indigenous population of Palestine. Nearly 400 Palestinian towns and villages were completely obliterated or "ethnically cleansed" during the 1947-48 Zionist conquest of Palestine.

Peres was also the chief of the Israeli navy, whose main task at the time was the illegal smuggling of men and arms for the Zionist forces in Palestine. When the war of 1947-1948 ended, Peres "assumed the position of Director of the Defense Ministry's procurement delegation in the United States," according to his biography. As director of arms procurement in the United States, Peres was responsible for organizing illegal arms smuggling. Transfers of weapons and planes to Zionist forces violated the U.S. Neutrality Act. Much of the Haganah arms smuggling activity was run from an office above the "syndicate-owned" Copacabana Club in New York City, where Peres and Teddy Kollek, the Hungarian-born son of the director of the Rothschild bank in Vienna, worked closely with the "crime syndicate" headed by the leading Jewish gangsters of the time.

After World War II, Kollek had been sent to New York, where he worked as the Haganah representative and head of its weapons purchasing team in New York. Kollek worked from an office above the Copacabana nightclub in the Haganah's Hotel Fourteen to arm the Zionist forces in British-occupied Palestine.


Ben Gurion and Haganah gun-runner Teddy Kollek

Also deeply involved in this criminal arms smuggling activities were the American Jews, Adolph "Al" Schwimmer and Hank Greenspun. Greenspun, the Las Vegas-based publicist for mobster Benjamin "Bugsy" Siegel, was eventually pardoned for his crimes by President Bill Clinton, a close friend of the Greenspun family. In 1951, at the request of Ben Gurion, Schwimmer and Peres founded Bedek, the military's aviation firm that became Israel's largest company, Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI).


Adolph W. Schwimmer, Zionist arms smuggler, and Ben Gurion

In 1952, the same year Ben Gurion made Isser Harel the head of the Mossad, he appointed Peres to be Deputy Director General of the Ministry of Defense. The next year, at the age of twenty-nine, Peres became the youngest ever Director General of the Defense Ministry, a position he held until 1959. It is interesting to note that Peres never attended university or served in the army, according to Ha'aretz (Israel) of June 14, 2007.

As Director General, Peres was a founder of Israel's military and its subsidiary, Israel Aircraft Industries. Ben Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, put Peres in charge of the establishment of the Israel's unlawful nuclear program and secret reactor at Dimona in the Negev Desert.

Peres has never been very popular with Israeli voters. Although he served twice as prime minister, he was never elected to that position. In 2000, he even lost a parliamentary election for the presidency to Moshe Katsav, an Iranian Jewish immigrant. Peres served as Israel's foreign minister under the Likud right-wing Ariel Sharon from early 2001 until November 2002. In July 2007, at nearly 84 years of age, Peres finally won the presidency, but only after Katsav was forced to leave office under a storm of allegations of rape and sexual misconduct.

One might wonder why an eighty-four-year-old man would even want to be president. Is this an example of the maxim, "no rest for the wicked?" Is Peres still working because he needs to protect the critical secrets about 9-11 and the war agenda it launched? Oddly, prior to 9-11, Peres, a politician from the left, held the most powerful positions of Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister in a government led by a prime minister from the extreme right, Ariel Sharon. Sharon, reportedly comatose since January 2006, is a well known terrorist, war monger, and war criminal with a long record of committing atrocities in Palestine and Lebanon. Peres held these highest level positions in the Israeli government from March 3, 2001 until November 2, 2002.

Peres, godfather and chief architect of Israel's high tech military and unlawful nuclear arsenal, is a person who has always supported the use of terror to coerce the West to support Israel's strategic goals. He has been involved, at the highest level, in numerous covert false-flag terrorist operations, such as the Lavon Affair, which was even kept secret from the Israeli prime minister at the time.


Ariel Sharon and Shimon Peres, who both have long histories of terrorism, headed the Israeli government in 2001-2002

Further reading: http://www.bollyn.com/america-the-target-9-11-and-the-history-of-false-flag-terrorism
 
Old July 1st, 2012 #4
Hans Norling
Randomly mutated kveldúlfr
 
Hans Norling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,095
Hans Norling
Default Re: Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

As someone who has worked for years in industrial smithing, coupled with an interest for metalurgy. I call this; Nonsense. No elemental aluminum was there in the samples. And yes, sulfur led to an eutectic mixture, and so it can not have been a thermitic reaction because it would've erased the eutectic mixture so that it would not be found in traces.

Jones wrote the following in his paper:
Quote:
In kaolin and other substances which incorporate Al and Si, the Al and Si are bound chemically -- that is, they will NOT separate under the action of a solvent such as MEK. That is why these MEK tests are so significant! WE thought of the possibility of an alumino-silicate early on of course, but then we did the MEK tests and were observed a separation of Al from other elements with this solvent - and this test RULES OUT strictly the notion that the aluminum which migrated is bound in an aluminosilicate
As usual, Harrit n Jones are lying through their teeth, believing no one will read and understand what they themselves included in their paper. The MEK-chip is first of all completely different from the others, so it can't be the same material. Secondly, MEK reacts very strongly with reducing agents like elemental aluminum. But... we don't see that particular reaction happening, which it would have had elemental aluminum been involved.

And the idea that the chemicals bonds would not seperate under MEK is nonsense as kaolinite desolves into silica and alumina, especially after 55 hours of being soaked in MEK.

The sample they soaked in MEK is Tnemec red primer paint, as evidenced by Jones himself (though he tried to hide that bit, as Jones and Harrit had a sample of WTC primer paint in their paper but without releasing it). Ironically, or perhaps I should say stupidely enough, they made the claim that the MEK sample was identical to the other samples (a-d) when it's in fact obviously and notably different in composition. Furthermore, we would expect primer paint to be stable at high temperatures, however, I noticed that in the Figs 20 and 23 of their paper, the red layer remains relatively stable, but the gray layer reacts and forms these microspheres. I.e the red layer remains intact but the gray layer is gone. If the red layer was nano-thermite it would fully react if ignition occurred and we would expect to see reactant products... but we don't.

I asked a chemist what kind of transformation one could identify here, as neither he nor I found it to have the properties one could approximate thermite with. He suggested that it might be a phase transformation from gamma-Fe2O3 to alpha-Fe2O3 which occurs as low as 260°C and the main reaction at 425°C, which is what is observed in the DSC. The "plate-like aluminum components" are aluminiumsilicates, and kaolinite matches the SEM. It is correctly stated in the paper that there are "highly uniform iron-rich rhomboid components". These are hematite crystals, a natural form of Fe2O3 (just like rust). Both hematite and kaolinite are natural minerals and have been used since the stone ages for... paints!

Even Harrit's own chosen source on nano-thermite reactions, Tillotson, proves how the heat reaction of a real experiment, the energy output thereof, is lower (as opposed to be a lot higher than thermite could possibly achieve). This is in part due to the fact that there are smaller grains of aluminum in nano-thermite (as the density and resistence to pre-ignition is greater for regular thermite, along with the fact that it's cheaper and easier to make, and was available prior to -01). If you're intention is to lay waste to columns, you'd have to go with something that has a very high thermal stability and energy-density. The energy released is twice Tillotson's nano-thermite. How is this possible, if it is a thermitic reaction (nano or regular)?
It's not even a poor match with the xerogel Fe2O3/UFG Al nanocomposite, it's a non-match.

Harrit and Jones could've done the same testing that Tillotson did with nano-thermite, and the latter scientist provides the sure way of how one specifically identifies thermite in a sample (powder X-ray diffraction). Harrit n Jones were either too ignorant or too dishonest to do that.

Harrit tries to attribute that the "excess heat" was from an organic compound, where the other heat was from the thermitic reaction, which is bs. If the energy (that which was above the 3.9Kj/g) came from a reaction other than the suspected thermite, there would not be one distinct peak but two distinct peaks in the DSC. Again, none of this is what one would see from thermite, yet we are supposed to accept that it is, even though it's contrary to the provided data?

It's no wonder the editor resigned when crap like this got published. Harrit, Jones and Co, if you're reading this. It will cost you less than $1000 to get this stuff identified beyond speculation and doubt. SEM's are not precise, you need to take after your own referenced source on identifiying thermite; Tillotson. Use XRD and FTIR, then you'll get a comprehensive and enormously more accurate analysis of the stuff. SEM-EDX is a surface analysis method, whereas through XRD you get the crystal structures identified.

Then again... you guys just wont do that will you? You know by now that such a definite process wouldn't show any thermite.

And why did they test it with oxygen? A thermitic reaction doesn't even require oxygen, that's why the ignition should've been done in an oxygen-free state, which is also what we see Tillotson doing (another detail missed by Harrit n Co). Because with oxygen there's a lot of materials that would activate, for example organic material from wherever. The bottom-line is, nothing presented is suggestive of thermite. In part, because so much of the grey and red layers match anti-corrosion coating materials and paint respectively. In order to eliminate any lingering doubt or the obvious flaws of their paper, they need to put it through XRD for example. Why hold us all in suspense with virtually nothing to show us? Why not do these tests properly with the results being unrefutably non-thermite or thermite reactive. If they don't have or do not want to spend 1,000 bucks, I suggest they and truthers petition Gage to give them the cash to do it and save us all these pointless discussions about inconclusive data.

Of course, since they are piss-poor at what they do or just dishonest with their work in favour of a conspiratorial bias, they also forgot another basic fact. E.g, what happens when sulfur is freed from sulphur? It creates SO2 (sulfur dioxide), a highly reactive thing. It causes corrosion (rust-attack, heard of it?).

From the Medical Management Guidelines:
Quote:
"Sulfur dioxide dissolves in water or steam to form sulfurous acid. Liquid sulfur dioxide corrodes iron, brass, copper, and some forms of plastic and rubber. Many metals, including zinc, aluminum, cesium, and iron, incandesce and/or ignite in unheated sulfur dioxide."
Ooops.

Additionally, here's what physicist David Rogers noted on Harrit n Jones paper:
Quote:
Harrit and co-workers used a differential scanning calorimeter to measure how much energy their chips produced when they reacted, and at what temperature they reacted. (That's the right tool for the job, because that's exactly what it's intended to do; it slowly heats a sample at a constant rate, and measures how much its temperature differs from what it should be from the heating rate. Any difference must be from the sample itself either releasing or absorbing heat in a chemical reaction.) They then claimed that their results agreed with Tillotson's results from doing the same thing with nanothermite. But there were actually some big differences.

First of all, Harrit's sample, as they knew, included some other carbon-based material, which might burn in air. If they'd done the experiments in argon, which doesn't react with carbon, then the carbon-based material woudn't have burned, and wouldn't have released any energy. But they did the experiments in air, so they may have got two reactions instead of one: the carbon-based material burning, and the thermite reaction. Both of these contributed to the energy they measured, and so they can't tell how much came from a thermite reaction and how much from simple burning.

Secondly, Tillotson measured how much energy is released from a given amount of nanothermite. When you compare the size of the pieces Harrit was analysing and work out how much energy they should have released, they actually released between two and ten times too much. There's no possible way that much energy could have come from a thermite reaction, so we know for certain that some of it must have come from simple burning. However, burning releases a lot more energy than a thermite reaction - more than twenty times as much as nanothermite - so it's perfectly possible that all the energy came from burning.

Finally, Harrit's samples reacted at a lower temperature than Tillotson's. That suggests that the reaction Harrit saw wasn't the same reaction that Tillotson saw. It also suggests that there was only one reaction, because Harrit's DSC trace only showed one peak.

Putting all this together, we know that Harrit's samples produced energy from simple burning of carbon-based substances, we strongly suspect that there was only one reaction going on, we strongly suspect that reaction was a different reaction to the one Tillotson saw, we know that a thermite reaction couldn't have produced the amount of energy Harrit measured, and we know that simple burning in air could easily have produced the amount of energy Harrit measured. The only conclusion that makes sense is that Harrit's samples had some carbon-based material in them - like, for example, the binder in paint - that simply burned in the surrounding air, and that there was never a thermite reaction at all.

What Harrit could have done, though, is carry out the experiments in an argon atmosphere, so that no burning could take place. Any energy released, if he did that, would have to come from some other reaction, and thermite would be the most likely candidate. That would have been very strong evidence of a thermite reaction, whereas at the moment all we have is weak evidence against one. And that's why Harrit's response when it was suggested he should do that - "WTC was not demolished under argon" - is so horrifyingly, monumentally stupid. It suggests that he doesn't understand the most basic principles of the experiment he's tried to do.

The other possibility would be that he did repeat the experiments under argon, didn't see any energy released, and doesn't want to admit it. But that would be quite a serious accusation, and I have no reason to believe there would be any substance to it.
And ss the french professor (Jerome Quirant) wrote when reviewing Harrit's paper, on these comparisons [I transcribed it from french]:
Quote:
Where is the endothermic peak on the curves proposed by Jones and coauthors in Figure 19 of the article? It would be quite a fluke that all the aluminum had reacted during the exothermic peak! And if this is due to the test being conducted in ambient air atmosphere, it would be a double fault on the part of authors! We can therefore say that it is in terms of energy (most, if not too variable), power, appearance of the curves obtained by the authors of the article have nothing with a characteristic reaction thermite, nor dried sludge anyway. While a test atmosphere of argon would have lifted ambiguity, the authors have completely missed their demonstration using ambient air.
...
We must now consider the alternative hypothesis that was to assume that these red chips were the simple paint. Are there any paints that can provide so much energy during a DSC test?
The answer is yes. For with a carbon matrix as we had envisaged in studying the structure crystal, it is likely that the energy released by the carbon in the presence of oxygen, which gave these DSC test results.
The likelihood of such a hypothesis is confirmed by this study that rightly practiced various tests DSC paints:

Fig 1. (a) DSC plot for VA/Veo VA copolymer.

The binder of the paint tested for this case from the document has almost as much power as heat thermite: 3.5 kJ / g! This is not surprising given the high calorific value of products used in paintings: ethylene, styrene, etc. ...
In any case, it proves the argument that a paint couldn't have such a reaction is not admissible. Even the presence of iron after the completion of the test can be explained by this energy, since if the Thermite (whose energy is bounded) arrives to do it, why not a material equally or even more energy?
...
The variation of energy delivered is also an argument that goes in the direction of a paint matrix rather than thermitic material which must have a strength and a mixture very sharp for the best performance.
We return all this in Part C.
...
Conclusion Part A:
Having reviewed four different approaches to the problem, it is time for a little balance. Analysis of the chips a, b, c and d.
  • A macroscopic observation allowed us to bring out two hypotheses for the origin ofthese scales.
  • The electron microscope study has shown a crystal structure that certainly had to ferric oxide, but not elemental aluminum necessary to initiate the reaction. The shape and platelet structure have put us on the trail of a compound frequently used for paintings, kaolinite, associated with a carbon matrix.
  • The spectra have confirmed this hypothesis with a map showing areas of concurrency evident between Si and Al spectra graphs showed a great similarity between those of kaolinite and those presented by the authors or FHC.
  • For finish, the analysis of DSC tests performed by the authors showed that the results obtained in air
It is very probable that we are in the presence of a paint, entirely normal, with constituents very classic (ferric oxide and kaolinite) and a carbon matrix.
To hold otherwise on these first 4 samples would be totally ridiculous, except to conduct the following tests:
  • DSC in a neutral atmosphere
  • Analysis XRD that would detect the presence of elemental aluminum.

Why did not Jones and his coauthors do this? This was no more complicated than they already proposed and yet hundreds of times more convincing. Were they afraid of the results?
 
Old July 1st, 2012 #5
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,087
littlefieldjohn
Default Re: Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

Exothermic welding used frequently with continuous rails, less often with building girders I think . From someone who used to off-hand grind and inspect weld joints for Norfolk Southern

Last edited by littlefieldjohn; July 1st, 2012 at 03:32 PM.
 
Old July 1st, 2012 #6
Pat Bateman
Member
 
Pat Bateman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dorsia
Posts: 342
Pat Bateman
Default Re: Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Norling View Post
As someone who has worked for years in industrial smithing, coupled with an interest for metalurgy
OK, good - you have a level of technical expertise on these matters which lends a certain gravitas to your insights.
So let me ask you -
Could the asymmetrical fires burning in WTC 7(as well as the damaged southwest corner) result in a perfectly symmetrical collapse such as this?
Or is this a controlled demolition?

__________________
....and this time, Hymie - We Go Vertical!
 
Old July 1st, 2012 #7
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default Re: Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

In no engineer, but I am familiar with the fact that many buildings of this era have aluminum window framings/casings that connect the large sheets of glass together. Aluminum has a relatively low melting point, an ordinary fire can easily melt it.

It doesn't seem at all unlikely that the streams of molten metal seen pouring down along the outsides of building 7 could very well have been melted aluminum of the type used in conjunction with the exterior glass.
 
Old July 3rd, 2012 #8
Hans Norling
Randomly mutated kveldúlfr
 
Hans Norling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,095
Hans Norling
Default Re: Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Bateman View Post
OK, good - you have a level of technical expertise on these matters which lends a certain gravitas to your insights.
So let me ask you -
Could the asymmetrical fires burning in WTC 7(as well as the damaged southwest corner) result in a perfectly symmetrical collapse such as this?
Or is this a controlled demolition?
First of all, the collapse of WTC7 was not symmetrical. A symmetrical collapse is a technical term, which most people do not recognize. Anyway, semantics aside, the reason for the building's uniformed collapse (at least half its path) is something I explained a bit on here.
 
Old July 3rd, 2012 #9
Pat Bateman
Member
 
Pat Bateman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dorsia
Posts: 342
Pat Bateman
Default Re: Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Norling View Post
First of all, the collapse of WTC7 was not symmetrical. A symmetrical collapse is a technical term, which most people do not recognize. Anyway, semantics aside, the reason for the building's uniformed collapse (at least half its path) is something I explained a bit on here.
Interesting stuff.
Wasn't most of the catastrophic structural damage confined to the southwest corner? I see in the NIST report that the failure of one of the easternmost columns (column 79) is the most likely culprit in initiating WTC7's collapse. That seems to be rather far away from any structural damage due to debris. I also see where the south side had numerous fires... wouldn't the combination of structural damage due to debris and fire lead to the south side collapsing first, rather than a uniform collapse?
__________________
....and this time, Hymie - We Go Vertical!
 
Old July 4th, 2012 #10
Nate Richards
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,431
Nate Richards
Default Re: Aspects of Thermite, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System in The 9/11 Demolitions

Quote:
It doesn't seem at all unlikely that the streams of molten metal seen pouring down along the outsides of building 7 could very well have been melted aluminum of the type used in conjunction with the exterior glass.
No, it seems quite impossible.

That metal was heavy. It fell fast and straight. That metal was glowing yellow, almost white-hot.

That wasn't aluminum. Only idiots, liars, and very frightened people are still trying to claim that it was aluminum.

I've worked with molten aluminum and steel. You can try it yourself in the back yard or just ask a welder. You can watch countless youtube videos and compare.

If you need tech talk: molten aluminum is highly reflective(shiny), but has little incandescence(it puts off very little light when heated), relative to molten steel.

Aluminum has double the "heat capacity" of steel. This doesn't mean it holds more heat, it comes closer to meaning the opposite. It means that it takes on and gives off heat much faster than steel does. This is why we use it to make the "radiators" in our cars and air conditioners. Ryan Owens(rkowens4, whose videos are linked to by government websites), one of the more professional shills out there, made a clumsy attempt at obfuscating that heat capacity detail when I challenged him with it years ago. He pretended not to understand, then continued pretending after a simple explanation and dictionary links were provided. Disingenuous squirming from those guys is high praise.

Those falling blobs would have lost their glow and shape very quickly if they were aluminum. There was more than a little wind that day, especially at that altitude.

Actually, they should have had little or no glow to begin with. They shouldn't have been hot enough. In daylight, there should have been no visible glow at all, even if they'd been a good deal hotter than this government claims they were. If those blobs were aluminum, they'd have been shiney like a mirror, or mercury, rather than visibly glowing. And if they'd somehow been so hot as to glow yellow in daylight(pretty much impossible), they'd have quickly lost their color when falling through the air.

Considering aluminum's low weight and high heat capacity, those blobs should have splattered and quickly solidified into asymmetrical shapes, then blown like chaff in the breeze.

You seem to be suggesting that glass was mixed into the metal. Are you trying to explain the glow this way? The glow is quite uniform in that material seen in the videos.

Melting glass and metal together won't blend them, it does the opposite. They separate and the glass will slag off. I was going to say "it's like oil and water", but mixing those would be quite easy compared to mingling molten glass and steel.

Where did you hear that glass theory? Is it yours? Might want to try something else.
__________________
No time for the old in 'n out, love. I've just come to read the meter.
 
Old July 4th, 2012 #11
Fred O'Malley
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Jewnited Snakes of Amnesia
Posts: 13,622
Default

Construction welding in highrise buildings, regardless of the construction materials, is confined to Mig, Tig & stick welding. Chemical welding, while sexy, is too hard to control by workmen, and scientists are cost prohibitive on construction sites.

Using the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) strategy on massive work sites is essential. It saves lives and keeps costs down. One major fuck-up can cost you your company. Radical Chemistry is too sophisticated a tool for the construction industry, but where engineers concentrate in demolition projects, it can be used successfully.
 
Old July 5th, 2012 #12
Hans Norling
Randomly mutated kveldúlfr
 
Hans Norling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,095
Hans Norling
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Bateman View Post
I also see where the south side had numerous fires... wouldn't the combination of structural damage due to debris and fire lead to the south side collapsing first, rather than a uniform collapse?
I addressed this in the linked post. The damage from the debris did not directly cause the building to collapse, it indirectly assisted and is what also caused the fires. The reason the building did not completely fall in a uniform pattern within its own footprint was likely due to the southernmost damage.
 
Old July 5th, 2012 #13
Hans Norling
Randomly mutated kveldúlfr
 
Hans Norling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,095
Hans Norling
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate Richards View Post
No, it seems quite impossible.

That metal was heavy. It fell fast and straight. That metal was glowing yellow, almost white-hot.

That wasn't aluminum. Only idiots, liars, and very frightened people are still trying to claim that it was aluminum.

I've worked with molten aluminum and steel. You can try it yourself in the back yard or just ask a welder. You can watch countless youtube videos and compare.

If you need tech talk: molten aluminum is highly reflective(shiny), but has little incandescence(it puts off very little light when heated), relative to molten steel.

Aluminum has double the "heat capacity" of steel. This doesn't mean it holds more heat, it comes closer to meaning the opposite. It means that it takes on and gives off heat much faster than steel does. This is why we use it to make the "radiators" in our cars and air conditioners. Ryan Owens(rkowens4, whose videos are linked to by government websites), one of the more professional shills out there, made a clumsy attempt at obfuscating that heat capacity detail when I challenged him with it years ago. He pretended not to understand, then continued pretending after a simple explanation and dictionary links were provided. Disingenuous squirming from those guys is high praise.

Those falling blobs would have lost their glow and shape very quickly if they were aluminum. There was more than a little wind that day, especially at that altitude.

Actually, they should have had little or no glow to begin with. They shouldn't have been hot enough. In daylight, there should have been no visible glow at all, even if they'd been a good deal hotter than this government claims they were. If those blobs were aluminum, they'd have been shiney like a mirror, or mercury, rather than visibly glowing. And if they'd somehow been so hot as to glow yellow in daylight(pretty much impossible), they'd have quickly lost their color when falling through the air.

Considering aluminum's low weight and high heat capacity, those blobs should have splattered and quickly solidified into asymmetrical shapes, then blown like chaff in the breeze.

You seem to be suggesting that glass was mixed into the metal. Are you trying to explain the glow this way? The glow is quite uniform in that material seen in the videos.

Melting glass and metal together won't blend them, it does the opposite. They separate and the glass will slag off. I was going to say "it's like oil and water", but mixing those would be quite easy compared to mingling molten glass and steel.

Where did you hear that glass theory? Is it yours? Might want to try something else.
No, you're not at all correct so I'm forced to assume you have not directly worked with melting aluminum at all beyond, at most, a brief encounter. I have worked for years in that business however.

The fact that the stuff is dripping and thus falling down from the corner says little on what metallic compound or alloy it is. There's nothing "shooting out of the building". It's a splash, most likely from the drippage impacting on the cladd or ledges of the building and/or reacting against the surface of the sides. If it had been an explosive "shoot" from inside the building itself, the aluminum cladding and windows wouldn't have been perfectly intact afterward (which, in the video, we can see they are).

Having seen my share of sparks from metals all across the board (and what the general metallurgic society says as well), you can't possibly determine a metal's compound or alloy by simply looking at its peaks of the emission-spectrum or the sparks it sheds when pounded on, scratched, impacted upon, hit by water or what have you. That just isn't possible. Certainly, a very qualified metalurgist or someone with similar keen eye can, under right circumstances, make good guesses but then mostly because of the expectance of the material in the given surrounding than any fail-safe blind test.

Metals all have emission-spectra, that means they change colour and shade depending on their temperature. The colour of pure aluminum at melting point is silvery, yes, but not beyond that. At around 600C pure aluminum will, depending on the lightsource, look silvery, but at 1,000C degrees it does not, simple as. If you are going by colour, the expected abundance of aluminum alloys and also potential mix other materials, or; that it was from the battery-stations which were located at that area. A third probability also exists; that it was a combination of both. These formentioned scenarios are all possible and available in the given event, whereas thermite isn't (nor would it stand to reason how it would melt the steel but not any of the other metallic compounds around the steel in the corner, in a location which would have little strategic value for such a device to be planted to begin with). So, a thermite-induced river of flowing metal that somehow didn't come from the trusses (since the floors would have caved in immediately had such a temp and feat been done) nor from the interior columns (since the columns would have collapsed immediately had such a temp and feat been done), which in any case would've brought a lot of other metals into the mix making identification of steel from the colour alone still very much impossible.

Here, for example, is molten impure aluminum, it's a guy who's molten some of his computers aluminum parts:


When you melt aluminum it starts to oxidize upon exposure to air and the emissivity of this is .44 compared to regular steel which is .35, so any notable degree of impurities (oil etc) will render a lot of oxidation of the molt and it will glow orange, pink, yellow depending on the temperature and light. Anyone with any experience from a foundry that handles this stuff could tell you that.

Quote:
Those falling blobs would have lost their glow and shape very quickly if they were aluminum.
If you've seen the video and stills, you can see the droplets turn silvery, greyish.

Last edited by Hans Norling; July 5th, 2012 at 12:00 PM.
 
Old July 5th, 2012 #14
Pat Bateman
Member
 
Pat Bateman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Dorsia
Posts: 342
Pat Bateman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Norling View Post
I addressed this in the linked post. The damage from the debris did not directly cause the building to collapse, it indirectly assisted and is what also caused the fires. The reason the building did not completely fall in a uniform pattern within its own footprint was likely due to the southernmost damage.
I read it; it was a good, thorough reply.

But there are so many inconsistencies and fabrications in the NIST report, that it resembles a work of science fiction, rather than a research document.


5.0 Collapse Initiation and Propagation

NIST’s computer simulation of the collapse of WTC 7, as presented in chapters 8 and 12 of NCSTAR 1-9, is remarkable for the low temperatures -as low as 100C – at which failures of connecting elements such as bolts and studs are predicted to have first occurred in WTC 7 after about 3:00 p.m. on 9/11. These failures were caused, so NIST asserts, by the thermal expansion of asymmetrical framing beams and girders on the east side of floors 12/13.

Nevertheless, in NIST’s model complete separation of column 79 from lateral restraints to buckling is predicted to occur only at temperatures well above 300C.

Thus NIST’s collapse initiation hypothesis requires that structural steel temperatures on floors 12/13 significantly exceeded 300C - a condition that could never have been realized with NIST’s postulated 32kg/m2 fuel loading.

However, assume for a moment that collapse initiation in WTC 7 did in fact occur as NIST states: by a thermally induced buckling failure of column 79 on floors 12/13. It would then be appropriate to ask: Is the collapse propagation mechanism proposed by NIST consistent with the observed collapse of WTC 7?

If the answer to this question is “Yes”, it would add credibility to NIST’s account of what happened to building 7 on 9/11 even if an inappropriate fuel loading was used to arrive at this conclusion.

However, I would suggest that NIST’s account of the last 1⁄2 minute of the life of WTC 7 not only lacks crucial physical detail, but is also at odds with what was observed in the collapse videos of WTC 7.

In NIST’s WTC 7 collapse simulation the fires in the lower part of the building severely heated floors 12 and 13 near column 79 causing it to lose lateral support and buckle. Then, according to NIST, the entire section of column 79 above floor 14 began to descendand trigger a global “disproportionate” collapse of WTC 7. In NCSTAR 1-9, Chapter 12, page 57, it is claimed that the top of column 79 was moving downward within 0.2 seconds of its buckling between floor 5 and 14.

Let’s consider this alleged motion of column 79 in more detail. Figure 12-43 in Chapter 12 of NCSTAR 1-9 shows column 79 buckling between floors 5 and 14 starting about 14.9 seconds into NIST’s collapse initiation simulation. The lateral displacement of column 79 is shown to be about 5.5 meters to the east of its normal fully vertical position at 15.5 seconds into the simulation. A consideration of the geometry of a column buckling over a length of about 36 meters shows that a lateral displacement of 5.5 meters should lower the top of the column by about 0.8 meters. In the same collapse simulation timeframe, (14.9 –15.5 seconds), NIST shows in Figure 12-45 that the vertical displacement of column 79 at the roof level was in fact 0.83 meters in 0.6 seconds.

This implies that within 1 second of buckling column 79 was movingdownwards with an acceleration of 4.6 m/s2or about 1⁄2 g which is a very dramatic motion for a column that was restrained by several framing beams and girders on all the undamaged and unheated floors above floor 14 just moments before collapse initiation.

I would therefore ask NIST to explain how and why all lateral supports acting on column 79 from more than 30 upper floors, were simply ripped out or otherwise detached from their very secure connections in only 0.2 seconds?

To conclude this section I would like to comment on NIST’s computer simulation of the final global collapse of WTC 7. Of course we are all very familiar with what actually transpired during the final moments in the life of WTC 7 because of the numerous videos of this dramatic event, as discussed in Chapter 5 of NCSTAR 1-9.

These videos typically present an unobstructed view of at least the upper third of Building 7 and permit the collapse to be followed for 4 -5 seconds. The videos show the upper section of WTC7 descending very smoothly as an intact structure, with the roofline remaining essentially horizontal until it passes behind buildings in the foreground. The only significant distortion of the boxed-shaped Building 7 that is noticeable after the façade begins its downward motion is the formation of a kink on the eastern side of the north face -a kink that becomes more pronounced as the collapse proceeds.

NIST’s measurement of the rate of descent of the roofline of WTC 7 shows a more or less constant acceleration of about 7m/s2 for the first 4 seconds of the collapse. This means that WTC 7 was falling at a speed of more that 15 m/s just 2 seconds into its collapse and had dropped over 50 meters (equivalent to about 12 stories) within 3.5 seconds. Nevertheless, as discussed above, the upper 12 stories showed very little evidence of trauma during this period of time apart from trails of smoke streaming from some broken windows as the building fell.

Now consider NIST’s description of the final moments of WTC7 as exemplified by the computer-generated simulacra of NCSTAR 1-9 and 1-9A. Computer images of the final collapse of WTC 7, such as Figure 12-69 of NCSTAR 1-9 and Figures 4-46 and E-4 of NCSTAR 1-9A, show very extensive buckling of the exterior columns over much of the building a few seconds into the collapse.
While there may be some questions regarding the scaling of the maximum deflections shown in Figure 12-69, Figures 4-46 and E-4 use lateral and vertical displacement contours that span 2 meters, a level of building distortion that should have been visible in the WTC 7 collapse videos, but was in fact not seen.

And consider also Figures 4-53 and 4-54 of NCSTAR 1-9A that show a localized cave-in of the top ten floors of WTC 7 at its northeast corner about the time of global collapse initiation –another behavior of Building 7 that was never observed. It is simply astounding that, although NIST’s computer generated images of a crumpled and severely distorted Building 7 look nothing like the video images of the real thing, NIST nevertheless concludes: “the global collapse analyses matched the observed behavior reasonably well.”

I would also like to draw attention to another problem with the global collapse analysis described in NCSTAR 1-9 and 1-9A of the Draft Report–a problem concerning NIST’s collapse timescale.

Although the precise instant of the collapse initiation of Building 7 is difficult to define, NIST states that significant downward motion of the entire roofline of WTC 7 started 23 seconds into its computer simulation of the collapse.

NIST also states that 24.5 seconds into the simulation, the roof of WTC 7 was falling with a velocity of approximately 10 to 15 m/s. This claim is at least consistent with Figure E-4 of NCSTAR 1-9A which shows thatthe roofline of WTC 7 had descended about 3 stories at 24.6 seconds of the simulation, or 1.6 seconds into global collapse.

However, let’s consider Figure 12-69 of NCSTAR 1-9 that purports to show the condition of WTC 7’s exterior 26.8 seconds into NIST’scollapse simulation, or 3.8 seconds after collapse initiation.

Measurements of the depth, width and height of the images of WTC 7 depicted in Figure 12-69 show that NIST’s simulation predicts that extensive column buckling at 3.8 seconds has dropped the roofline of WTC 7 about 5 stories or 20 meters.

This is simply notconsistent with observations of the actual collapse of WTC 7 which show that the roofline dropped by about 15 stories, or 60 meters, 3.8 seconds after collapse initiation.

Further reading Here
__________________
....and this time, Hymie - We Go Vertical!
 
Old July 6th, 2012 #15
Hans Norling
Randomly mutated kveldúlfr
 
Hans Norling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,095
Hans Norling
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Bateman View Post
I read it; it was a good, thorough reply.

But there are so many inconsistencies and fabrications in the NIST report, that it resembles a work of science fiction, rather than a research document.
I think that's a grossly unfair and inaccurate an assessement of the reports. I see that you're using Frank Greening's papers. That's all well and good. I might not agree with him every step of the way but he's made some really thoughtworthy papers regarding the WTCs. We've spoken plenty of times and I have even found use of papers he's written, such as 'Energy Transfer In The WTC Collapse' and the one he co-authored with Bazant & Benson; 'What Did and Did not Cause Collapse of WTC Twin Towers in New York'. He's quite critical of several points/details within the volumnous NIST-reports, however he still believes the buildings came down due to a combination of damage from the planes and the subsequent fires and, simultaneously, have argued against the thermite/tnt-alternative theories of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

A couple of other papers also critical of NIST's briefs, was 'How did the WTC Towers Collapse: A New Theory' (Collapse could have occurred from fire alone; thermal expansion. By Usmani, Chung, Torero, Arup Fire & University of Edinburgh. PDF) and Cherepanov, G.P. (2006). "On the collapse of the World Trade Center on September 11", 2001. J. of Applied Physics.(pdf) (arguing on behalf of fracture-wave and tensile failure over creep and thermal expansion).

Last edited by Hans Norling; July 6th, 2012 at 07:32 AM.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51 PM.
Page generated in 0.30718 seconds.