Are the 9-11 I-beams cut in sharp angles?

Originally posted by whiterabbit

So, you're ACTUALLY going to try and float the argument that the photographer was standing right there from the time the WTC came down until he took that picture DAYS LATER?

The person that took the pictures worked for Verizon. They were in the frikken building during the frikken collapse.. These are Verizon's photos.

newscenter.verizon.com...

Got it?

Originally posted by Connected
Show me an example of a bent and shattered beam from explosives. Not any explosives, an LINER SHAPED CHARGE. Please.

So, wait, wait. Your argument is now that a LSC would produce a nice square cut-off beam like that in the picture.

Just when I said I'd heard everything.

I never said anything about thermite on this beam.. drop it.. stop using your fog tactics.

Baloney. You've supported the thermite theory in numerous threads. Are you now switching theories to explosives?

All the way across?? Are you sure about that?

Yes. I can't see the back side, but the front sides of both columns are cut all the way across with a cutting torch.

They would NOT have cut them all the way across like that if they were just going to plant explosives on them. It wouldn't have been safe.

No.. they were not at the Verizon building.

They were cutting steel beams on one side of the Verizon building.

But apparently, to you, it's incredulous that they might have to cut beams on the other side of that building for some reason. Yup, makes perfect sense.

Our first assignment for the morning was to begin to cut some of the steel beams that fell on Vesey Street, between Building 6 and the Verizon building.

The fact that you are debating with nothing more than opinion, doesn't prove JACK SHIAT.

Opinion where?

Fact: Those are torch cuts.
Fact: They were cutting steel beams on the other side of the Verizon building.
Fact: Those steel beams show no visible signs of anything BUT torch cuts.


This is debunked as debunked gets. You're just clinging to it because you can't stand to be wrong about anything.

Well, you're wrong on this. I'm sorry, but you are. It doesn't mean your entire controlled demolition argument is wrong, but you ARE wrong about those beams.

Originally posted by whiterabbit


I've never seen a 1" brick--ever. I doubt you could even find a building made with them.

Maybe cuse the building is like 80 years old.

B.T.W. you know the thickness of the steel beam right?

Originally posted by Connected
The person that took the pictures worked for Verizon. They were in the frikken building during the frikken collapse.. These are Verizon's photos.

newscenter.verizon.com...

Got it?

This just gets worse and worse. Did you even LOOK at those other pictures?

There are two other pictures taken from the same time. The other three are from later.

Those two pictures... One shows a crane hoisting people over the wreckage and shows people working to clear debris.

The other shows the same thing, but shows a trackhoe clearing debris.

Is your argument still that nobody was moving debris or cutting stuff then? Because your own posted information is contradicting you.

Originally posted by Connected
Maybe cuse the building is like 80 years old.

Nope, sorry. They might do some ornamental work with 1" thick bricks, but they would never build an entire building with one.

Not only would the bricks not have the same compression strength as a normal brick, but it would take FOREVER to mortar in 1" bricks.

Those bricks are not 1". I don't even know where you got that.

Originally posted by whiterabbit

So, wait, wait. Your argument is now that a LSC would produce a nice square cut-off beam like that in the picture.

.

How many frikken times do I have to repeat myself??? They used both a cutting torch AND lsc's to prep the building.. If i have to say it again, I'm going to put you on ignore.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Baloney. You've supported the thermite theory in numerous threads. Are you now switching theories to explosives?
.

THERMITE WAS USED ON WTC 1 AND 2 NOT WTC 7. Jesus......

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Yes. I can't see the back side, but the front sides of both columns are cut all the way across with a cutting torch.
.

You answered YES when your answer should be know. I asked if you can see all the way around and you say "i cant see the back side", but you also answer "yes". Do you understand how stupid you sound?

Originally posted by whiterabbit
They would NOT have cut them all the way across like that if they were just going to plant explosives on them. It wouldn't have been safe.
.

You are basing this statement above and your OPINION, since you can not see the back side of the beam. All your arguemnts are opinion, and it makes me sick. No wonder you believe in the most idiotic theory called the official report.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
They were cutting steel beams on one side of the Verizon building.
.

No they were cutting steel beams that fell from WTC 1 and 2 that landed on Vesey Street. The only cross referances on Vesey street to their location was WTC 6 and Verizon. They were NOT at or in the Verizon building.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
But apparently, to you, it's incredulous that they might have to cut beams on the other side of that building for some reason. Yup, makes perfect sense.
.

Because they needed to clear Vesey Street in order to reach WTC 5 and 6.



quote]Originally posted by whiterabbit
Opinion where?

Fact: Those are torch cuts.
Fact: They were cutting steel beams on the other side of the Verizon building.
Fact: Those steel beams show no visible signs of anything BUT torch cuts.

.

DUDE I AGREE THAT IT IS PARTIALY CUT BY A TORCH, AND YOU ARE AGREEING TOO. THESE WERE CUT BEFORE THE COLLAPSE.

You are basing your observation on OPINION. It is only your opinion that they cut that beam, just because they were cutting beams on the other frikken side of the building.. Does that mean that every steel beam that I give you evidence of being cut, you will automaticaly dismiss it because firefighters were cutting in some other location at the time??

Give me a break, you are pathetic.

Originally posted by whiterabbit

Originally posted by Connected
Maybe cuse the building is like 80 years old.

Nope, sorry. They might do some ornamental work with 1" thick bricks, but they would never build an entire building with one.

Not only would the bricks not have the same compression strength as a normal brick, but it would take FOREVER to mortar in 1" bricks.

Those bricks are not 1". I don't even know where you got that.

Now you are debating bricks. LOL. Your tactic of fogging the debate is not working buddy. Those are 1" bricks, they are NOT for support. The link I gave you should have cleared that up.

Yes it would have taken forever.. Thats probably why the building took 4 years to create.

Anyway.. once again.. do your reasearch.. find out how wide that steel beam is, and then picture them stacked on top of eachother.. that will give you the same measurement... Do it.. im sick of doing your homework.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
This just gets worse and worse. Did you even LOOK at those other pictures?

Yes I have pictures they dont even post.. The point of that link was to prove to you these pictures are FROM VERIZON AND THE SAME PEOPLE THAT TOOK THE PICTURES WERE IN THE BUILDING DURING 911 WHICH YOU SAID WAS IMPOSSIBLE.

Originally posted by whiterabbit

Oh please, there's no way that photographer was able to watch that building from the time the WTC came down until he took that picture. .

Sure is if the photographer WORKED FOR VERIZON.

[edit on 19-3-2007 by Connected]

Originally posted by Connected
How many frikken times do I have to repeat myself??? They used both a cutting torch AND lsc's to prep the building.. If i have to say it again, I'm going to put you on ignore.

1. See the front of the beam how it's cut from one end to the other? They wouldn't have done that if that was prep work for an LSC. That would've made them unstable.
2. An LSC wouldn't make a nice squared-off beam like that. It would be mangled.
3. Ignore me. It just shows you can't defend your argument.

THERMITE WAS USED ON WTC 1 AND 2 NOT WTC 7. Jesus......

Yeah... How could I confuse something so obvious. *eye-roll*

You answered YES when your answer should be know. I asked if you can see all the way around and you say "i cant see the back side", but you also answer "yes".

You didn't ask if I could see if they were cut all the way around. You asked if I could see if they were cut all the way across.

They ARE cut all the way across.

You're the only person who would assume they're not cut on the back side as well, but whatever.

Do you understand how stupid you sound?

Here come the personal attacks again.

You are basing this statement above and your OPINION, since you can not see the back side of the beam. All your arguemnts are opinion, and it makes me sick. No wonder you believe in the most idiotic theory called the official report.

Why in the WORLD would you think the other side of the beam is any different?

No they were cutting steel beams that fell from WTC 1 and 2 that landed on Vesey Street. The only cross referances on Vesey street to their location was WTC 6 and Verizon. They were NOT at or in the Verizon building.

ALL these pictures were taken at the same time:

newscenter.verizon.com...

Still going to tell me they weren't doing any debris removal?

DUDE I AGREE THAT IT IS PARTIALY CUT BY A TORCH, AND YOU ARE AGREEING TOO. THESE WERE CUT BEFORE THE COLLAPSE.

Really? I'm looking at the official site these pictures came from, and it says nothing about that.

So where did you get this information from?

Does that mean that every steel beam that I give you evidence of being cut, you will automaticaly dismiss it because firefighters were cutting in some other location at the time??

If they are OBVIOUSLY TORCH-CUT like this one, then yes.

Give me a break, you are pathetic.

It must be hard to be unable to argue with resorting to personal attacks.

Originally posted by Connected
Those are 1" bricks, they are NOT for support.

Those are not 1" bricks. Those are normal-sized bricks. Anybody with eyes can see that.

Originally posted by Connected
The point of that link was to prove to you these pictures are FROM VERIZON AND THE SAME PEOPLE THAT TOOK THE PICTURES WERE IN THE BUILDING DURING 911 WHICH YOU SAID WAS IMPOSSIBLE.

Then you just shot yourself in the foot again, because NONE of those pictures were taken on 9/11. It even says that on their site.

Again, did you even read it?

And here's a press release Verizon put out on September 12, 2001, where they talk about being allowed to re-enter the building to start working on getting phone service restored:

newscenter.verizon.com...

But I suppose it's completely impossible that they cut those beams because they wanted to keep that debris from crushing in that side of the building, which from the pictures appears to be full of telecommunications equipment.

Yup, that doesn't make any sense at all. It must've been thermite bombs!

Originally posted by whiterabbit

1. See the front of the beam how it's cut from one end to the other? They wouldn't have done that if that was prep work for an LSC. That would've made them unstable.

Nope, I see only a partial cut, and the rest looks a bit like it was snapped, probably by explosives.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
2. An LSC wouldn't make a nice squared-off beam like that. It would be mangled.

No a liner shaped charge with a copper liner would cut it quite nicely. "SHAPED" is the key word in that explosive setup.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
3. Ignore me. It just shows you can't defend your argument.

No, I have been defending myself with photo evidence, and expinations of such evidance, but you seem to be 100% ignoring MY explinations, and asking the SAME question over and over and over, making myself repeat it. I will put you on ignore if I have to repeat myself again, so that I will not be attempted to even bother answering the same questions over and over and over agian. Got that?

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Yeah... How could I confuse something so obvious. *eye-roll*

Maybe if you would have known that the only video and photo and physical evidence of thermite was on WTC 1 and 2, not 7, you wouldnt be so confused. Obviously you do not know as much as I, about 911, or you would have known that.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
You didn't ask if I could see if they were cut all the way around. You asked if I could see if they were cut all the way across.

Across, around, YOU meant the same thing. YOU were saying it was entirly cut, the whole thing, by a torch. That would mean, across, and around, and through, completly, entirly. Do you really have to go dinto detail with you? Are you paying attention to your own arguments? Are you purposly trying to argue with these stupid staw man tactics?

Originally posted by whiterabbit
They ARE cut all the way across.

You're the only person who would assume they're not cut on the back side as well, but whatever.

Of course, in a figure of speach they ARE cut. But they were NOT cut just with a torch, they were particaly cut with explosives. Get it?

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Here come the personal attacks again.

That wasn't a personal attack, it was a SERIOUS QUESTION. Do you know how stupid you sound? Please reread this threat from begining to end out loud.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Why in the WORLD would you think the other side of the beam is any different?
.

Because the texture of the cut changes. One side is messy like it was cut with a torch, and the other has more finer edges, like a shaped charge would make.. My theory is that both a torch and lsc's were used.. do I have to keep saying that.. 100000000000 times???

Originally posted by whiterabbit
ALL these pictures were taken at the same time:

newscenter.verizon.com...

Still going to tell me they weren't doing any debris removal?

NOPE, they were NOT taken at the same time. Some are earlyer than others. Prove they aren't, or are, you haven't yet, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOTHING.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Really? I'm looking at the official site these pictures came from, and it says nothing about that.

So where did you get this information from?

........................are you kidding me? Hello, are you there? Anybody?

Originally posted by whiterabbit
If they are OBVIOUSLY TORCH-CUT like this one, then yes.

So you are saying, even if WTC 7 WAS a controlled demolition, and they used exactly the method I describe (cutting torch and lsc), that because they used cutting torches to help clean up 911 you can absolutly rule out that anyone preped the building for CD using the method???????

Originally posted by whiterabbit


Then you just shot yourself in the foot again, because NONE of those pictures were taken on 9/11. It even says that on their site.

Again, did you even read it?

I'm not debating when those pictures were taken... why are you??? seriously... I even said when there were taken!!

This is what I was telling you.... "There was people working IN THE VERIZON BUILDING ON 911. They saw the debris ON 911, and when they returned they took the pictures. They, the photographers them self said the debris were the same as they were since they fell.

I said I have OTHER pictures as well that WERE taken on 9/11. There are 100's of them. Go look at WTC 7 pictures.. please... DO YOUR HOMEWORK

[edit on 19-3-2007 by Connected]

Originally posted by whiterabbit
And here's a press release Verizon put out on September 12, 2001, where they talk about being allowed to re-enter the building to start working on getting phone service restored:

newscenter.verizon.com...

But I suppose it's completely impossible that they cut those beams because they wanted to keep that debris from crushing in that side of the building, which from the pictures appears to be full of telecommunications equipment.

Yup, that doesn't make any sense at all. It must've been thermite bombs!

Yes a press release on 9/12/01 that is 1 day away from 9/11/01. They were in the buidling during the collapse, and went back the next day as well. Got it? That proves without a doubt, they were there every day since 911, like you are trying to debate they weren't.



[edit on 19-3-2007 by Connected]

Dude... You have no argument here. You're just arguing because you can't stand to be wrong about ANYTHING.

Those beams were cut with a cutting torch. No, I can't see all of the way around them, but I can see the front and the entire front is done with a cutting torch--which would not have been done if they were planting explosives.

Your argument that the other side, which we can't see, probably contains evidence of explosives is illogical. You might as well conclude that the land of Narnia is behind that column. You've got about the same amount of evidence for that.

However, we know for a fact that people were cutting beams around the Verizon building as early as September 12th.

Therefore, it is logical to conclude that they had some reason to cut those beams as well.

But no, it must be thermite bombs! Somehow you just KNOW there's evidence of those magical thermite bombs on the other side of those columns! Even though there's no evidence of explosives damage in the picture, it MUST be explosives! Even though we know people were cutting beams nearby, it MUST be explosives! Even though that rascally photographer just decided to photograph the non-exploded side, it MUST be explosives!

There is no logic in your argument at all. None.

Someone cut the columns AFTER the collapse. Accept it. Let it go.

[edit on 19-3-2007 by whiterabbit]

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Dude... You have no argument here. You're just arguing because you can't stand to be wrong about ANYTHING.

No YOU can't stand being wrong, that is why you debate with OPINION and not FACT.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Those beams were cut with a cutting torch. No, I can't see all of the way around them, but I can see the front and the entire front is done with a cutting torch--which would not have been done if they were planting explosives.

Prove to me that it was cut all the way around with a torch. There is only evidence of torch on one side, that evidence is discoloration of the rusty metal. Please, show me evidence of your OPINION.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
However, we know for a fact that people were cutting beams around the Verizon building as early as September 12th.

No there were NOT "around the Verizon building", you are lying. They were on "Vesey Street, in front of the Verizon building and the WTC 6 building". You do not have proof they were on West Street between WTC 7 and the Verizon building.. you only have OPINION.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
But no, it must be thermite bombs! Somehow you just KNOW there's evidence of those magical thermite bombs on the other side of those columns!

You are absolutly delusional! Now you are making your OWN theorys from fantasy land! Get it together lunatic! Nobody here but you saying anything about thermite bombs... didn't we already go over the thermite issue? Did you forget? Its only a few post above... jesus man, you lost it.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
There is no logic in your argument at all. None.

Logic is there, its just not in your head.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
Someone cut the columns AFTER the collapse. Accept it. Let it go.

Then tell me why the hole in the building is so small? Do you not see that if the beam was longer there would be a bigger hole in the building??

[edit on 19-3-2007 by Connected]

Originally posted by Connected
Prove to me that it was cut all the way around with a torch. There is only evidence of torch on one side, that evidence is discoloration of the rusty metal. Please, show me evidence of your OPINION.

Dude, you can SEE one side is cut with a cutting torch.

Only someone who wants to believe in a crazy conspiracy theory would conclude that the other side MUST show evidence of magical explosives that don't mangle steel columns.

Everyone else here in reality would just go, "Yeah, it's probably cut by a cutting torch as well."

No there were NOT "around the Verizon building", you are lying. They were on "Vesey Street, in front of the Verizon building and the WTC 6 building". You do not have proof they were on West Street between WTC 7 and the Verizon building.. you only have OPINION.

They were cutting beams next to the Verizon building on September 12, 2001 on Vesey Street. That's an undisputable fact.

So, to you, it's impossible that they, for whatever reason, went around to that side of the building and had to cut some columns as well.

No, you conclude, it HAS to be explosives. Even though the column shows no sign of explosives. Even though the column looks like it was torch cut and nothing else. Even though we just established they were cutting steel columns on the other side of the building the day after the attack.

That doesn't even make sense. Unless you're psychic, the logical conclusion is that they cut those columns as well.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
They were cutting beams next to the Verizon building on September 12, 2001 on Vesey Street. That's an undisputable fact.

Yes but you have no proof what so ever that they were cutting beams next to the WTC 7 building at that time. You do know we are talking about the WTC 7 steel being cut, and not the Verizon building right?

Originally posted by whiterabbit


Only someone who wants to believe in a crazy conspiracy theory would conclude that the other side MUST show evidence of magical explosives that don't mangle steel columns.

Do you not know how cleanly a shaped charge can cut steel? Why are you imagining some stupid cartoon render of a blown up cannon?

Let me show you what a shaped charge made from a WINE BOTTLE can do to a steel plate.

commercially available conical shape charge on a steel plate



a shape charge made from a wine bottle (the concave bottom works nicely to focus the blast) on another steel plate



..and now.. the damage that was done.

NICE CLEAN HOLES.

Imagin what a liner shaped charge can do. Heck I already did, and it might look like a torch cut it! WOW. /sarcasm/











[edit on 19-3-2007 by Connected]

[edit on 19-3-2007 by Connected]