Interesting photo of ground zero

Not to mention, absolutely NO evidence of any blast residue. An explosive charge would have left some visible residue.

reply to post by thedman


yes the picture in the topic board i agree maybe but these on these are from day one to the end of the clean up

this is the good ones FEMA Photographer Kurt Sonnenfeld - Complete WTC Photos - Video Slideshow
first pictures are from day one to the end check this post www.abovetopsecret.com... you will see any steel beam are cut 180 degree any one of them look whit attention you will see man that is crazy

You see all the 180 degree strate cut and rusted is was not a fresh cut

reply to post by knowneedtoknow


The angled cuts were made during clean-up . This has been proven time and time again .

Not sure what you are calling a "180" degree cut , I'm assuming you are referring to the straight ends which are seen in over 90% or better of the beams in the wreckage .

The reason for those straight ends is because that's where the beams were joined to other beams , they simply broke at the welds , which would be expected .

Everyone should click on the link in the OP and scrutinize the larger image closely .

It clearly shows numerous chunks of concrete of substantial size . In fact , there is one rather large slab at top-center of the image .

Hopefully , this should dispel the myth that all of the concrete was vaporized . But , I doubt that it will , there are those who will just continue to ignore the facts .

And , I agree the tear is from an attachment that ripped loose during the collapse .

Wow, this is a great discussion!

I think every photograph taken on 9/11 should have it's own thread!

What a great way to analyze and get other's perspectives on what they see.

Im just having a hard time picturing how the edge of the beam got peeled back on itself and didn't rip off with the piece that was spossedly attached to it. Theres not a whole lot of steel left holding it on compared to how much is missing.

also can we stop calling them rivets, their obviously nuts and bolts that arn't even a part of the piece in question.

could it been explosives, sure, does this picture prove anything, nope. Better off focusing on something else.

Originally posted by sodakota
Wow, this is a great discussion!

I think every photograph taken on 9/11 should have it's own thread!

What a great way to analyze and get other's perspectives on what they see.

Yeah, but after the truthers post the thousandth "suspicious photo" they think is "smoking gun" evidence that just turns out to be yet more typical collapse damage, the truthers will just turn around and post "suspicious" photo number one thousand and one and insist IT is smoking gun evidence. You know that and so do I.

Is this genuine research or is this a case where someone is so much in love with an idea that they simply don't want to let it go?

reply to post by okbmd

the Fema photographer name is Kurt Sonnenfeld
ok there is something going on man this guy ran away from usa to argentina whit his picture from Ground Zero and then the usa governament kill his wife in 2002 and stage her murder to get him back defenitly there is something on this pics that the usa governement dont wont you to see and wont it back thats a fact so i will check them all

Read more:

Fugitive unlikely to return from Argentina to Denver for murder trial - The Denver Post

A man wanted in Denver on suspicion of killing his wife in 2002 has become a celebrity in Argentina for his anti-U.S. conspiracy theories, making it increasingly unlikely that he will ever stand trial here for murder.

Kurt Sonnenfeld's allegations of persecution by U.S. officials have earned him refugee status and the sympathy of a Nobel Peace Prize winner and have made him a popular news figure in Argentina, where he recently published a book called "El Perseguido," or the hunted

Read more at:www.denverpost.com...

Looks to me like something was attached there and was torn out in the collapse. There are bolts or rivets clearly visible just to the side of the hole.

reply to post by knowneedtoknow


No, Kurt murdered his wife and fled the country. It was only AFTER the US Government tried to extradite him that all of the sudden he had "proof" of a conspiracy.

reply to post by vipertech0596


Nope sorry they had kurt in jail the first time but no proff that he did so they release him so he took the videos of one month of films from ground zero because he knew he was setup and he did ran away to argentina with them.

november 2001 After he went to tailand with his wife he had an affair with 2 womens and his wife did find out, the wife familly said that she was depressive and did buy a gun and she wrote a suicide note when they arrest him he didnt have no gun power residue

www.sott.net...

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by remymartin
The steel has been peeled back from the steel beam maybe like an explosive charge has been attached and detonated, what do you guys think

Something had been bolted to the beam and it had been ripped off. You can even see the rivets that had held it onto the beam directly beneath the hole.

This is almost certainly damage that was inflicted during the collapse, specifically because of the collapse.

there was no plate or any kind of attachment for another connection...and any kind of instant force like was experienced there, would rip the plate off, NOT take a huge chunk from the column itself, like what is observed.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
Not to mention, absolutely NO evidence of any blast residue. An explosive charge would have left some visible residue.

really...are YOU an expert on visual determination of incendiaries?

Since there was NO TESTING done for that, to give PROOF to the OFFICIAL Gov. claim of "NO Explosives or accelerants were used to assist in the collapse"....where does the DENIAL come from?

oh...and PLEASE don't go into a rant about...."oh....well there was NO wires or someone would have seen ...'Terrorists'...carrying boxes of explosives in"

In both debate and law...those who assert...MUST prove

Originally posted by hgfbob
In both debate and law...those who assert...MUST prove

Very true, so how about showing the proof that explosives or thermite was used to bring down the 3 towers....

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by sodakota
Wow, this is a great discussion!

I think every photograph taken on 9/11 should have it's own thread!

What a great way to analyze and get other's perspectives on what they see.

Yeah, but after the truthers post the thousandth "suspicious photo" they think is "smoking gun" evidence that just turns out to be yet more typical collapse damage, the truthers will just turn around and post "suspicious" photo number one thousand and one and insist IT is smoking gun evidence. You know that and so do I.

Is this genuine research or is this a case where someone is so much in love with an idea that they simply don't want to let it go?

well..isn't that what the "official HYPOTHESIS", is....someone in LOVE !

for it surly does NOT have PROOF to back it up.

The ONLY thing keeping the OS afloat, is the LACK of knowledge by the American people....The FACT that there is absolutely NO evidence to support it....just an agenda.


The HYPOTHESIS of WTC7, MUST be based on ONLY...common office hydrocarbons...the SAME fuel ALL office fires feed.

why has this NEVER occurred before or since.....for ANY building structure....steel......stick...

isolated fire causing a free fall ACCELERATED symmetrical total global unified collapse.....lol...and the ONLY way that NIST can PROVE the HYPOTHESIS...is by the DATA they fed into their simms...the VERY SAME DATA...they REFUSE to release, citing...."public safety" as the ONLY reason for not releasing the 68,000 files of data

you are so pathetically funny

reply to post by hgfbob


Saying something over and over does not a fact make. Check out the links in my signature and look at all the evidence. This is not just hot air. This is various sources of information all saying the same thing. "The towers collapsed without the help of explosives." Like I've said in the past, this doesn't mean I suddenly believe the government is all nice. I know they lie and cheat and kill, but I just can't blame them for the specific part of 9/11 about the towers physically collapsing.

reply to post by hgfbob


[exreally...are YOU an expert on visual determination of incendiaries?

Since there was NO TESTING done for that, to give PROOF to the OFFICIAL Gov. claim of "NO Explosives or accelerants were used to assist in the collapse"....where does the DENIAL come from?

oh...and PLEASE don't go into a rant about...."oh....well there was NO wires or someone would have seen ...'Terrorists'...carrying boxes of explosives in"
]

No, But I imagine the FDNY is and were crawling over that site for months doing body recovery

Also members of my local bomb squad from Passaic County (NJ) Sheriff Department spent 3 weeks on the site during the recovery

Talked to several of them - no bombs ......

Originally posted by hgfbob
well..isn't that what the "official HYPOTHESIS", is....someone in LOVE !

No, not really. For one thing, we know that planes had hit the towers, we know there were fires burning within them, and we know what properties office fires have. We do NOT know there were controlled demolitions anywhere in the building, we do NOT know there were nukes in the basement, and we do NOT know there are orbiting secret laser weapons. It seems to me we need to take the available facts first, and then see what end conclusion best makes the facts come together. We should NOT come up with a sexy sounding scenario first, and then add or subtract the facts as we see fit to get them to conform to the preexisting scenario.

The "fires brought down the towers" scenario may be controversial, but they're a hell of lot less controversial than armies of secret gov't ninjas romping around skyscrapers planting concealed explosives without anyone noticing anything, or super weapons noone has seen before that violate the laws of physics.

for it surly does NOT have PROOF to back it up.

The ONLY thing keeping the OS afloat, is the LACK of knowledge by the American people....The FACT that there is absolutely NO evidence to support it....just an agenda.


The HYPOTHESIS of WTC7, MUST be based on ONLY...common office hydrocarbons...the SAME fuel ALL office fires feed.

Nope. It's ALSO based upon the fact that falling wreckage from WTC 1 destroyed the power grid and cut off all water to the fire suppression systems in WTC 7, which allowed it to burn out of control to begin with. If you can supply an example of any other office fire that was allowed to burn out of control as in WTC 7, by all means please do so.

you are so pathetically funny

I really don't care if you think I'm pathetically funny, whether I'm stupid, or whether you think I kick pregnant dogs. All I care about is whether you can prove anything I post here is incorrect.

reply to post by dereks


thermite there is tones of proof there is like 2000 scientise saying there is thermite in the dust

2nd one thermite total control of zionist usa media try to interrupt him will hi explain something come on lololo its alway the same whit usa when u have proof against them they put u on commercials or no time left sorry we have to stop

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by hgfbob
In both debate and law...those who assert...MUST prove

Very true, so how about showing the proof that explosives or thermite was used to bring down the 3 towers....

ummm...I don't have the ALREADY official Gov. claim...that none were used or found



please show the testing or other procedures that leads to THAT official denial

YOU support the OS...YOU are just as responsible for backing your claims