Windsor Tower in Madrid, Spain burned for 20+ hours and never collapsed. No steel frame structure had ever collapsed due to fire, before or 9/11. On 9/11, 3 collapsed, due to "structural failure from fires".

submitted by HibikiBlackCaudillo from i.redd.it

all 46 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]zyxzevn 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The 3 towers fell in free fall, which means that the floors underneath did cause no resistance and were falling before they were hit by above floors. A practice common in demolition to prevent buildings from collapsing sidewards. As we can see that they fell into their own footprints.

They also were spewing around lots of heavy debris. But in free fall there is no energy for it. Everything should just fall down. So there was a lot of added energy that caused the debris (including some fire-fighter-parts) to move sidewards. Sometimes even faster than the falling speed.

In the remaining dust we can see remains of explosive materials. And we can see traces of extreme high temperatures that are common with these explosive materials. Like molten Molybdenum and condensation of vaporized iron. The materials are so corrosive that a nearby building was seriously affected. It also caused many of the cars being affected, as if they were burning. The materials were still burning for many days under water.

The remains of the planes had non-matching part numbers, but matched with military planes instead. Also their higher speeds and maneuverability matched with military planes. During the flight of each of the planes, the transponder was disabled in a radar-less area, while a military plane was around in their area. During the hijacking a huge military "exercise" was going on, simulating hijacking of planes.

And to fight an old bearded man in a house in Pakistan, the military first went through 3 countries.

[–]trident765 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

They turned "jet fuel does not melt steel beams" into a joke, because mockery was their only defense.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

it's also true

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The tricked people with a simple misdirection. "Oh, look, something shiny..." Their strawman was about weakening steel, not melting steel. Then you get people talking about how this threads of steel Brillo might melt with a small amount of forced air, far from this scenery, as is the wind blowing flames of burning carpet, paper, and curtains.

Anyone who read the NIST report can instantly tell it is a collection of hand-wavy excuses with a predetermined result. The lack of a real investigation is a dead give away. No investigation started for a year after it happened, even.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Reports stated that the pit at the base of the twin towers had molten metal for several weeks after the event from the thermite, and that girders had been cut at strategic locations.

[–]Dunwidit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I saw the pictures... The steel beams cut at exact angles. Not not a beam melted and twisted off but a clean angled cut so that they would slide apart allowing the building to collapse into its own footprint.... Exactly like they do in demolitions... Fascinating how they were able to do that with Just airplane. Really the most extraordinary series of unlikely (impossible?) coincidences.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I like 9/11 conspiracies as much as the next person, but this one is lame; it's about two totally different kinds of structures: traditional Spanish I-beam & concrete throughout all levels and sections, vs. WTC tubes, with massive beams around the outside and light-weight cross-beam interior flooring.

Making this comparison weakens the arguments about a conspiracy, making conspiracists seem dumb. Instead, stick to the better theories.

[–]jagworms 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The point here is that this Spanish building burned throughout, for many hours. Every structural member was under thermal stress. . .yet it stood. On 9/11, the buildings were on fire from the point of impact - UP. The lower 80 floors were not on fire, and not structurally weakened by the thermal stress of fire - yet the strength of those floors evaporated all at once when the top floor started moving down.

[–]Reddit_Sucks 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Lol

I guess the core of wtc 1/2 was just made from Lego parts?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The related conspiracy is that the side beams should not have collapsed so well, indicating that there must have been additional explosions

[–]Dunwidit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Legos wouldn't have collapsed like that...

[–]package 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

This conspiracy theory is right up there with a flat earth as the most insane, retarded, reaching, illogical, scientifically and historically illiterate nonsense ever to be suggested and believed by people not actively smearing their own shit on the walls of their padded cells.

[–]Insider 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

ok astroturf, that's why the government covered it up, muzzled witnesses and spread propaganda after the event.

Max Cleland resigned from the 9/11 Commission stating the commission had been “deliberately compromised by the President of the United States.” https://archive.is/Xs1OP

Commission members even considered bringing criminal charges against Pentagon officials who had deliberately lied to them about the military’s complete lack of response on that day. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/08/02/911-panel-suspected-deception-by-pentagon-span-classbankheadallegations-brought-to-inspectors-generalspan/89e3e63d-ff53-47e9-93fa-2cf79791051c/

One of the commissioners, Bob Kerrey, said the Commission couldn't do it's job and that it was a 30-year conspiracy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtJWBcWAeAw

Any non-astroturf who actually looks into the details of 9/11 will end up realizing it was government orchestrated. Intelligence agencies around the world know it was a CIA/MOSSAD scheme, as stated by Italy's ex-president: https://www.corriere.it/politica/07_novembre_30/osama_berlusconi_cossiga_27f4ccee-9f55-11dc-8807-0003ba99c53b.shtml

[–]package 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As I said in a previous comment, this scenario does not require that the attacks on the wtc were orchestrated by the state. Rather, they may have been interested for some time in securing a larger presence in the middle east and were just waiting for an excuse to invade.

[–]Rob3122 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Explain building 7

[–]package 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

The official explanation goes into a lot of detail and seems pretty reasonable, though I guess since it's from the gov it's completely wrong just because

[–]jagworms 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

The official explanation is worthless, and you're naive and gullible to believe it. You don't have to know what really happened to clearly smell the bullshit.

[–]Insider 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Government astroturfs working over time to keep up the propaganda. I mean..what's the point, any real person who would posts on saidit likely believes it was government orchestrated.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Because government sponsored 'experts' are never wrong lol https://www.ae911truth.org/

[–]Rob3122 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

So fires on floors 7-13 caused building 7 to collapse from the bottom right into itself exactly like what would happen during a controlled demolition?

Controlled demolition https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xYjF9WPyZfg

Building 7 at the 2 min mark collapses just like the controlled demo above. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PK_iBYSqEsc&t=121s

[–]proc0 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Is it a coincidence there haven't been anymore attempts at that scale ever since? Sure there have been some bombs here and there, but we're talking a crazy movie plot, stealing airplanes, defying the military, and crashing into buildings. Did the terrorist give up, did they just have that one grand plan? What was their point and why aren't they attempting more like this? Iraq had little to do with it anyway, so it's not like we struck at the heart of the terrorist camps. Surely they would have kept attacking at that scale after 20 years... it's almost like the war on terror was mostly fabricated.

All of these things add up, but people are too afraid of "conspiracy theories", which I think has been evident in the recent years with how news and media brainwashes the general population.

[–]package 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Is it a coincidence there haven't been anymore attempts at that scale ever since?

Wow it's almost like the aftermath of 9/11 spawned the TSA and drastically tightened security both on the ground and in the air, and passengers are now far more prone to stop hijackers.

Did the terrorist give up, did they just have that one grand plan? What was their point and why aren't they attempting more like this?

Maybe because there was an invasion going on and they went into hiding?

it's almost like the war on terror was mostly fabricated.

This does not require that the wtc attacks were a setup. Would it not be far more reasonable to assume that the state had a desire to invade iraq (or any country in the middle east) and was just waiting for an excuse?

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

This does not require that the wtc attacks were a setup. Would it not be far more reasonable to assume that the state had a desire to invade iraq (or any country in the middle east) and was just waiting for an excuse?

Those two things are possible at the same time. I'm also not saying anything with certainty, and I'm avoiding talking about the actual incident because it's already talked about at length. If they crashed a plane into a building, I would think they'd have more tricks of that type to try around the world. It really feels like they just gave up and had a couple decades of regular attempts, which I think suspiciously coincides with the time before people had cellphone cameras. I don't think terrorists would care if they get recorded because they go on suicide missions, however the government would definitely care if everyone has cameras.

For the most part I think questions cannot be asked (recently it was literally put on a watchlist), which to me is the main problem. Government took away privacy because of the incident, yet asking to be transparent is too much. That's at least very suspicious.

[–]Insider 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, the astroturfs here aren't gonna give any real explanation. Here are some of the discrepancies:

  • buildings collapsed demolition style. According to the original engineers, even a 300 ton 747 would do “nothing” to the integrity of the buildings

  • NIST paint testing found that less than 2% of the steel ever even made it to 480 degrees F. Your oven can handle 480 F.

  • Steel loses half its strength at 1,100F which would still be more than enough strength to support the building, but at the NIST estimated 480F steel temperatures (not gas) the steel hardly loses any strength at all.

  • multiple MSM outlets connected to intel agencies reported the collapse of WTC7 before it even happened

  • nano-thermitic particles found in the debris/dust

  • massive elevator renovations before the event with some floors completely shut down

  • There was a power shut down on the weekend

  • Paul Bremer, friend of the Bushes and prior CEO of Marsh and Mclennan, who leased the exact floors of the impact and had “special fireproofing” put specially on those floors, mysteriously missed work that day and was on the news blaming Osama Bin Laden as 9/11 happened!

  • witnesses and testimonies of explosions/bombs going off (~118 witnesses)

  • Witnesses were suppressed, many started dropping dead (suicide, heart attacks) and some received death threats

  • Phillip Marshall, an experience pilot who exposed details of 9/11 in his book was killed along with his family, children and pet. https://www.amazon.com/Big-Bamboozle-11-War-Terror/dp/1468094580

  • WTC 7 building water and sprinkler systems were shut off / put in “Test” mode early the morning of 9/11

  • Larry Silverstein also became Leaseholder of World Trade Center Buildings a few months prior to 9/11, he paid $15M for the 99 year lease and quickly insured it against domestic and foreign terrorism in which he received a $5 Billion dollar payout

  • Larry Silverstein ate breakfast at “Windows On The World” at the top of the Trade Center every single morning since July 2001, except for on 9/11 https://youtu.be/er5sKb8aXv0 (His children who worked in the WTC also happened to miss work that day)

  • Larry Silverstein created plans for a new World Trade Center in 2000 https://youtu.be/j-_WYHwUtcI

  • cover up and obstruction of investigation after the event (6 out of 10 of the 9/11 commissioners said they weren't able to do their job)

  • insufficient NIST report, contradicting itself on the reason for collapse. No actual scientific explanation to date.

  • numerous pilots claim they weren't skilled enough to fly the planes into the building, yet we're expected to believe some brown ppl with minimal training were able to do it

  • Bin Laden denying responsibility

  • Unclear video and translation/transcript of Al-Qaeda as "evidence"

  • For 1 hour and 40 minutes the hijackers flew around in highly restricted airspace. Only 4 jets were left in US north east airspace that day, the rest had been moved to Canada.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

https://imgur.com/gallery/MWl6ikX

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"demoralized" is an underrated term

[–]buffalo_fart_the_IV 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

But did this get hit by a jet?

[–]HibikiBlackCaudillo[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Did tower 7 get hit by a jet?

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Did you read the report about 7? It was built in a way that's no longer recommended because fires can cause that kind of construction to collapse the way it did.

[–]chadwickofwv 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Because the government can always be trusted to oversee itself, right???

[–]jagworms 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

No it wasn't. That NIST report is a complete smokescreen, and "F" level engineering homework. Dr. Leroy Hulsey has done a proper investigation. Look into it.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Link me to a text report or you and L.H. are both full of hot air.

[–]jagworms 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

https://www.ae911truth.org/wtc7 https://www.ae911truth.org/news/658-in-the-name-of-engineering-science-and-truth-leroy-hulsey-and-roland-angle-on-the-final-wtc-7-report https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7

Knock yourself out. In the absence of Hulsey's report, the NIST paper and it's conclusion don't align with the multiple angles of video that exist. The NIST report is unscientific and fake. Hulsey modeled the building multiple ways, ultimately proving that the only way to make the building behave as seen in the video is to remove all vertical support nearly simultaneously.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

The NIST report actually does align with videos and plot twist it actually adresses the videos LOL here's a video of a presentation including their simulation that shows it collapsed from inside first https://www.c-span.org/video/?280569-1/investigation-world-trade-center-building-7

Check this calculator. The spans were up to 16.4m long. Plug in the temperature you like. I used 700c as a mid-range temperature an office fire might burn. It expands such a length of steel by 15cm. A 15cm length change on a structural member with nothing pushing on the other side is going to bend beams and/or break bolts.

From the linked page: One guy without relevant experience and a guy with an axe to grind. This should be stupid. They said fire didn't bring it down, which was true. They handwaved and said 'our model showed the very top floors collapsed first' but didn't explain why a couple of failed floors at the very top would take the building down. They didn't explain why nobody heard or recorded the amount of noise that would be required by explosions inside if explosives were used, either.

They mention this report https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/ which says fire did not cause the collapse, but the building structure failed near-simultaneously, which is approximately what NIST concluded with a retarded twist. It was done by a couple of students (vs. a larger team, scores of world-class experts @NIST). The study says the building collapsed in a way which the video clearly shows it did not do, so it can be pitched for that reason alone. You can watch the failure progress across the width of the building. They also said

We cannot completely rule out the possibility that an alternative scenario may have caused the observed collapse

which is weasel-words for "we're not sure". They ran a different set of numbers than NIST did and came to different conclusions, these students. They found another set of experts agreed with NIST but poo-pooh'ed their conclusions. They said the other experts who studied it were dum-dum heads because fires don't burn hot. Having hand-waved away and poo-pooh'd the conclusions of literally experts, these students said they must all be wrong because this novel kind of building had a novel kind of failure. They made assumptions which were questionable. Possibly the silliest is treating steel pins as springs in their model. They said if you change a bunch of things then NIST's analysis would be wrong, without adequately addressing why NIST was wrong and these students are right. They guessed at the construction of WTC7 in a few places, even! They changed significant parts of their models to save computing time (vs. NIST who just let their simulations run for.e.ver). Critically, they changed juuuuust enough in their models to cause juuuuust enough less shift than would then lead to the failure NIST said happened. They even said their modeling software couldn't keep up with NIST's version. They went on to infer that something else must have happened and came up with an even less-plausible scenario than NIST's progressive collapse.

And then, just when it was getting good, the paper stopped. They concluded with "it all broke at once" and gave exactly zero reason for it to have done. Rubbish. The report from these university students may have earned them some cachet, but for me it was only a brilliant display of chutzpa.

The only way it could have collapsed literally all at the same time was with explosive charges, which were 100% not heard or reported by anyone. It would have been loud as, and it wasn't, ergo that doesn't explain it, which means the students were wrong and y'all are bamboozled.

But thanks for the link, it gave me something to read for most of an hour.

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

A hundred eye witnesses said it sounded just like a controlled demolition - boom boom boom, as at fell.
A dozen angles of video show a freefall collapse.
The NIST model stops running as soon as the collapse begins, and then they assume what comes next.
If the NIST conclusion of thermal expansion is correct, there would be entire semesters of engineering curriculum dedicated to studying this failure mode so it doesn't happen again.
Barry Seale said explosions followed him out of the building as he and a colleague tried to escape. They worked in the building. You must be tired from reading for a whole hour.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Multiple search engines give me one barry seale: a drug smuggler

Thermal expansion of steel is very well known already and the international building codes went through dozens of changes to reflect the NIST findings. A novel application and a novel failure don't make a novel branch of science!

The timing of the "freefall" is not actually a freefall LOL

People also heard explosions as the twin towers came down, which also didn't happen. There's video of the fall and it doesn't have explosion audio. You know what people may have mistaken for explosions before the free-fall collapse? Destruction of the building during the cascading not-actually-freefall collapse. Bystanders are not as reliable as video (which we have) and experts (who say unanimously there were no explosions).

You (all troofers actually) are grasping at straws and bad science. Do better.

[–]jagworms 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

My bad, it was Barry Jennings.

It's pretty gullible of you to believe that WTC 7 was built like a house of cards and could essentially liquidate itself through its own core because one beam fell off of it's column seat.

"The final report was issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on October 26, 2005. That report lists 13 NIST investigators, 78 contributors to the investigation, and 5 NIST “experts and consultants.” That’s a total of 96 people versus the 3,486 architects and engineers who say the federal government’s report is unreliable and must be re-opened." https://wallstreetonparade.com/2021/09/the-federal-investigation-of-9-11-ignored-recorded-eyewitness-accounts-of-firefighters-who-heard-explosions-just-before-the-towers-collapsed/

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yea, all those who reported the explosion and fire in the basement have been suicided. The denial is strong in you.

[–]buffalo_fart_the_IV 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not from what I remember. I think it fell because it was structurally fucked.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Did the WTC, or was it an explosion? Soon after we heard all about 'drone' planes used under Obama and nobody bats an eye. No witnesses or video footage of the first plane, and only a select few dubious videos of the second, some of which heavily cgi'd...

[–]buffalo_fart_the_IV 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There was video of the first one. But there was only one video. I can't remember who took it but it was a street shot looking up. It wouldn't surprise me about the CGI. I do think that the towers went down by planes I don't think the Pentagon did and I don't think the Pennsylvania one blew up like that. I mean there was just nothing on the ground that's crazy.

[–]Dunwidit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah not the only anomaly from that day.... Even if the steel had failed at that floor it certainly wouldn't have dropped into its own footprint at freefall speed. It's amazing how people still think that that was a plane that took that down. You show him the Pentagon images.... One neat little hole... Book still open next to a computer on a desk... But supposedly the wreckage from that plane disappeared In the heat of its own fire. (I want to know what that book was made of 🙄) and the only significant piece of wreckage recovered was the engine fan that turned out to be the same size and type they use in a cruise missile....