Spike Lee hopes that Congress holds a congressional hearing about 9/11

Spike Lee is promoting his HBO documentary series, “New York Epicenters: 9/11-2021½” which seems to show both sides of the argument - the big question ruffling the media is that of fuel and whether or not it could get hot enough to melt the structure in the manner reported.

I don't care for most of Lee's work, but as he says, he has been called racist, anti-semetic and mysogynistic, and he's still here. All of his "fame" gives him cred where it's needed most; among "educated," "metropolitan," and "liberal," citizens who cannot see there is a problem with the message around 9/11.

The “Do the Right Thing” director has admitted that he doesn’t buy into “official explanations” of the terrorist attacks that devastated the world on September 11, 2001, while speaking with the New York Times on Monday.

I hope this gets the response Lee is looking for IF it actually gets aired.

a reply to: BlissSeeker

To bad he believes the false argument….

He claimed there was not enough heat in jet fuel to melt the steel and claimed World Trade Center building 7 collapsed like those in controlled demolitions

www.dailymail.co.uk...

"...the way Building 7 fell to the ground — when you put it next to other building collapses that were demolitions, it’s like you’re looking at the same thing.”

Except the core of WTC 7 fell first. Then at least one exterior wall of 7 fell across the top of its own debris pile.





At at least part of the top fell outward.





Would you say this was “melted” steel.



I wouldn’t

But WTC 5 I think it is. Showed the steel frames of the WTC buildings were susceptible to deforming under load and hight temps.

And fire related failures.

originally posted by: BlissSeeker
Spike Lee is promoting his HBO documentary series, “New York Epicenters: 9/11-2021½” which seems to show both sides of the argument - the big question ruffling the media is that of fuel and whether or not it could get hot enough to melt the structure in the manner reported.

I don't care for most of Lee's work, but as he says, he has been called racist, anti-semetic and mysogynistic, and he's still here. All of his "fame" gives him cred where it's needed most; among "educated," "metropolitan," and "liberal," citizens who cannot see there is a problem with the message around 9/11.

The “Do the Right Thing” director has admitted that he doesn’t buy into “official explanations” of the terrorist attacks that devastated the world on September 11, 2001, while speaking with the New York Times on Monday.

I hope this gets the response Lee is looking for IF it actually gets aired.

Nah, I'd save that energy and wait until after this year's 9/11 has come and gone, just in case...

Spike Lee yanks 9/11 conspiracy theorists from HBO documentary series amid scrutiny

www.latimes.com...

We can post about his other theories…

Were the levees bombed in New Orleans?
It is the latest urban legend — the belief that the destruction of New Orleans’ heavily poor, heavily black Ninth Ward was neither an accident nor an act of nature. NBC's Lisa Myers investigates.

www.nbcnews.com...


“Certainly appears to me to be an act of genocide and of ethnic cleansing,” Leah Hodges, another New Orleans citizen, told the committee.

Similar statements, sometimes couched as rumors, have also been voiced by Louis Farrakhan, leader of the nation of Islam, and director Spike Lee.

“I don't find it too far-fetched,” Lee said in a recent television interview, “that they try to displace all the black people out of New Orleans.”

Are we back to this crap again.

The fire DIDN'T melt the steel. The temperature increase because of the fire weakened the steel by reducing it's Yield Strength. Once the loading on the steel exceeded it's Yield Strength the steel failed causing the collapse. Strength of Materials 101.

The Towers collapsed vertically because of their unique design.

Spike should stick to making bad movies.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
Are we back to this crap again.

The fire DIDN'T melt the steel. The temperature increase because of the fire weakened the steel by reducing it's Yield Strength. Once the loading on the steel exceeded it's Yield Strength the steel failed causing the collapse. Strength of Materials 101.

The Towers collapsed vertically because of their unique design.

Spike should stick to making bad movies.

The yellow crap pouring out WTC2 is what Spike was referring to:

Spike Lee Is Right: Fire Can’t Melt Steel — and Molten Metal Was Everywhere

a reply to: democracydemo

There's other types of metal other than steel that have a lower melting point.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
a reply to: democracydemo

There's other types of metal other than steel that have a lower melting point.

Many others yes; but in that color and quantity to pour like porrage.

I'd like to address the elephant in the room, re: the actual doc which only talks to Democrats. Spike is totally tanking this in only talking to the left. It's basically a left wing hit piece. I get why people hate Trump, he was a total dick but come on, we should be getting over this crap by now. He's not in office and hasn't been for nearly a year.

Where does it say steel pours like portage?

Let me get this right. You refute it wasn’t other metal with lower melting points by using a food analogy.

Oh boy.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
Are we back to this crap again.

This "crap" has never left. And isn't going anywhere at least for as long as I still breathe.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
The fire DIDN'T melt the steel.

Oh really?



and:

www.consensus911.org...

The evidence is overwhelming that there was molten steel. And if that is true as the evidence suggests, then that also means something else other than office fires brought the buildings down. Which then also means that Dr. Jones' and other independent analyses of the dust showing un-detonated thermitic particulates is also true, and at least one reason why the buildings collapsed. And of course the latter is true because there were multiple independent analyses of the dust, which all showed the same thing.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
The temperature increase because of the fire weakened the steel by reducing it's Yield Strength. Once the loading on the steel exceeded it's Yield Strength the steel failed causing the collapse. Strength of Materials 101.

That would only explain a localized collapse at the fire zone only. Strength of Materials 101 suggests that a massive steel fortress cannot fall through itself, the greatest resistance, at the same speed as it would with zero resistance. That is scientifically and physically impossible. Unless one lives in an alternate universe where the laws of physics differ from this universe.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
The Towers collapsed vertically because of their unique design.

Their "unique design" was a massive fortress of steel, assembled horizontally, vertically, and diagonally for the absolute maximum amount of support. You can't get much more secure than horizontal, vertical and diagonal with steel beams to secure a structure.

For your "theory" to be accurate, the buildings would have to have been severely poorly built, with cheap welds and connections, which would cause either of the buildings to collapse under minimal stress. But they did not.

Not one single person can sit there with a straight face, and claim that some building materials caused a total and complete collapse of a massive steel tower, but the force of a jetliner traveling around 500mph could only cause minor damage? Come on. If the "poorly built" theory had any merit whatsoever, the force of the plane impacts would have caused massive damage to the impact areas, up to and including a local collapse of the top structure above the impact areas. No fire needed. The "poorly built" theory just doesn't hold any weight against the evidence or physics.

originally posted by: TheSpanishArcher
I get why people hate Trump, he was a total dick but come on, we should be getting over this crap by now.

Unfortunately, it's not going anywhere anytime soon. Trump has most of the Republican party licking the bottom of his shoes, and he continues firing up the base with his false conspiracy election claims, and false claims about what really happened on January 6. As long as he has a voice and people to listen, this isn't going anywhere. This Republican party is not the real Republican party, and in its current state, has no business in modern society. I truly hope people wake up and vote these pricks out of office. Otherwise, there will almost-assuredly be a civil war in the near future the way things are going.

a reply to: _BoneZ_

You

The evidence is overwhelming that there was molten steel.

Strange. I don’t see any molten steel? Or molten cut ends on the core that fell last….

originally posted by: neutronflux
Or molten cut ends on the core that fell last….

Here you go:



That is very clearly white smoke (not gray concrete dust) coming off the very end of the core column from being cut with explosives. There are a few videos where you can hear the detonation booms from 2+ miles away. There is no doubt whatsoever, not even a microscopic residue of a doubt, that these buildings were brought down with incendiaries and explosives. It doesn't matter who you want to blame: Israel, Iran, terrorists from a cave, U.S. government. You can blame anyone for 9/11 you like. But that will never detract from how the buildings collapsed.

a reply to: _BoneZ_

You

That is very clearly white smoke (not gray concrete dust) coming off the very end of the core column from being cut with explosives.

Define white?



This picture was from a no explosives hydraulic jack collapse initiation.

You mean “white” as how the camera exposure tries to make sure darker areas are properly exposed, causing areas with more light being over exposed.

Or a building full of drywall and concrete will create a white cloud.

You

end of the core column

You mean the supposed core columns cut just ahead of every collapsing floor?

Which is a truth movement fantasy.



The towers didn’t fall through the cores. The floors systems where stripped from the cores. The core was left standing with no lateral support.



Then started tumbling after standing whole seconds from loss of lateral support.

You

There are a few videos where you can hear the detonation booms from 2+ miles away

Evidently not. Or you would link to them.

I have posted about this too…. In another thread

quote]originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo


Don’t have too. Your created evidence and frequencies are not reflected in the seismic data for detentions with the force to cut steel columns. By frequency, how can you tell if a fire cracker sets off vs a pressurized air conditioning unit exploding in a fire. Other then the ac unit exploding would be more forceful. Again, nobody is say there were no explosions. But, keep on making your own reality.

And the whole argument.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: neutronflux

With ease:

The same old out of context with no attempt at quantification argument.

Nobody disagrees there was explosions from closed pressurized systems like refrigeration units and air conditioning units cutting loose in the fires. And nobody disagrees there wasn’t a pop when floor connections failed as in WTC 5 being an example.


A detonation that makes a transient pressure wave in the atmosphere where the pressure wave has the force to cut steel columns is entirely different.

And your easily debunked again.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

You didn’t hit a nerve with me. You created your own “evidence”.

Now again...

I counted them on the video did i not?

Is that after your claim you tweaked the audio? So you are manipulating the sound? Where, if the “explosions” actually had the force to cut steel columns, the detonations would be clear, obvious, and would have echoed about manhattan.

Let’s say you claim eight loud bangs that are expected from any large building fire, or from a structure failing by overloading.

Eight bangs who’s audio you manipulated, is that false?

Next, there is no way CD systems would survive the jet impacts and fires to initiate collapse on the floors impacted by the jets as attested to by the video evidence.

Next you claim:

Nature of material used to cut core colums (Nano-thermite anyone)?

If you are saying nano-thermite cut the columns by shockwave, it still would have to create a pressure wave to cut the columns. The energy created by that shockwave is still going to produce audible energy of at least 130 dB.

If you are saying thermite cut the core columns, then why is the no visible white hot sparking from the WTC video evidence. Why would there be “explosive” sounds. Thermite burns relatively slow. Why is there no glowing metal from the collapse video?



Next. You.

Would, lets say, a normal shaped cutting charges even leave this evidence in the first place? Provide evidence for your claim!

But you are not claiming shape cutting charges are you?

You claim eight explosions from the video you “tweaked”?

I did some tinkering with the original video/audio and ended up with this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Oh. Sorry. You tinkered. Nice that you “tinkered” to create your “evidence” that should be obvious.

Anyway.

You again.

Would, lets say, a normal shaped cutting charges even leave this evidence in the first place? Provide evidence for your claim!

Let’s say you claimed eight loud bands you
Tinkered into “evidence”.

You claim eight cutting charges? Well, flight 175 probably took out about 7 core columns, and the tower did not fall.

Some estimates are more than 7 core columns taken out by Flight 175, with no serious consideration the tower would have collapsed from the jet impact.

That indicates your eight supposed “explosions” could not be cutting charges on individual core columns to take out enough of the 44 core columns to initiate collapse. For you fantasy to work, the supposed explosives would had to be wide area in nature. Not eight shape charges only taking out eight columns. Explosions that would need to take out multiple core columns with each detonation. Explosions that would look like the one event that is known to have taken out 7 core columns, and produced a seismic event of .7 magnitude.




Again. CD systems would not have survived the jet impacts and fires to initiate collapse of the twin towers as attested to by video evidence.

You are falsely confusing expect sounds of “explosions” from a building fire, and expected from a building failing from being overloaded.

You have produced no evidence of explosions with the force to cut steel columns. Explosions that would be obvious, awe inspiring, and echoed about manhattan.
Very similar to the explosive sounds starting around 4:14 mark of the FDR drive video

18 Views of "Plane Impact" in South Tower | 9/11 World Trade Center [HD DOWNLOAD]
m.youtube.com...

a reply to: _BoneZ_

You

There is no doubt whatsoever, not even a microscopic residue of a doubt, that these buildings were brought down with incendiaries and explosives.

There is actually zero evidence. Just truth movement innuendo and lies.

originally posted by: neutronflux
Define white?

This picture was from a no explosives hydraulic jack collapse initiation.

You mean “white” as how the camera exposure tries to make sure darker areas are properly exposed, causing areas with more light being over exposed.

Or a building full of drywall and concrete will create a white cloud.

You're reaching for a whole bag of straws that has nothing to do with smoke coming off the very ends of core columns, signifying they were cut with explosives.

originally posted by: neutronflux
You mean the supposed core columns cut just ahead of every collapsing floor?

The columns were not cut ahead of each floor. The core was detonated in sections from top to bottom, allowing the floors and outer walls to easily give away, and the collapse to easily progress all the way down. The cores of those buildings were separate, free-standing entities. They absolutely had to be broken up in sections to allow the buildings to collapse. No core removal = no building collapse.

a reply to: _BoneZ_

You

You're reaching for a whole bag of straws that has nothing to do with smoke coming off the very ends of core columns, signifying they were cut with explosives.

I’m no the one who’s only evidence of controlled demolition is a false narrative. And is literally “smoke” and mirrors.

One. You have no explanation how your fantasy controlled demolition systems survived jet crashes that stripped away insulation, broke steel columns, severed elevator and electrical cables. And how detonators and wiring survived fires to initiate collapse at the areas of the jet impacts.


Two. White smoke (which could be from camera over exposure, drywall dust, or the fact the building was literally already on fire) is not exclusive to pyrotechnics.

A sequence of the hydraulic jack CD



Wow squids and white smoke…





Three, the buildings were not set up to capture demolitions shrapnel.

Do you know what happens when traps and water barrels are improperly placed, or not used at all. People are killed from flying steel.

Katie Bender's family commemorate 20 years since Royal Canberra Hospital implosion

www.canberratimes.com.au...

Katie was was killed instantly by a steel fragment sent flying from 430 metres across the lake. It was thought to be travelling at 140km/h

Canberra Hospital Implosion 1997

m.youtube.com...

Or something like this..

Couple Nearly Killed By A Flying Rock From Building Demolition

m.youtube.com...

Four. Thermite has inconsistent burning times. There should be sparking, flashing, and molten material visible in this these photos






Five. The buildings did not collapse through the path of greatest resistance. Cores fell last

Now…

The columns were not cut ahead of each floor. The core was detonated in sections from top to bottom,

Funny. Whole lengths of the columns are tumbling out. No signs of them being cut. No sparking and flashing. No visible balls of shockwaves pushing shrapnel out.

You

allowing the floors and outer walls to easily give away, and the collapse to easily progress all the w

False narrative. The cores were completely stripped of floors before the core columns started to tumble.



You

The cores of those buildings were separate, free-standing entities. They absolutely had to be broken up in sections to allow the buildings to collapse. No core removal = no building collapse.

And yet, the video evidence shows they weren’t broken up by explosives. They fell and tumbled from loss of lateral support provided by the floor systems.

The floor system provided stiffness and stability to the framed-tube system in addition to supporting the floor loads.

tsapps.nist.gov...

Now, why did the floor system fail.

It wasn’t from explosives. No evidence of explosives working on the floor connections.

Failure of Welded Floor Truss Connections from the Exterior Wall during Collapse of the World Trade Center Tower

app.aws.org...

Summary

Analysis of the connections supporting the composite floor system of the WTC towers showed that at and below the im- pact floors, the greater majority (above 90%) of the floor truss connections were either bent downward or completely re- moved from the exterior column. This was probably related to the overloading of the floors below the impact region after col- lapse initiation. Depending upon weld joint geometry, detachment of the main load-bearing seats was a result of either fracture in the heat affected zone of the base material (standoff plate detached from spandrel) or through the weld metal (seat angle detached from standoff plate). Failure in both cases was assumed to be a result of a shear mechanism as a result of overloading from floors above impacting those below. There did not appear to be a significant change in distribution of failure modes of the floor truss connections when comparing those connections inside vs. outside of the impact region or those ex- posed to pre-collapse fires and those that were not.