Hey Bob this is good information..911

Bob wrote:Teo,  as much as I've read about 9/11 and Silverstein and all the rest,  a question comes to mind for which admittedly I have no answer.

Was anybody even trying to make Silverstein remove the asbestos?
Do you know the answer to that?
Because if nobody was even telling him he had to remove the asbestos,  then why did he even want to bother with blowing the thing up?

So while I'm watering the plants, go to googling the truther sites again and see if you can get us an answer to that.

Yes the buildings were condemned and it was on a time line for removal...the buildings were over half unused anyway...not a very profitable investment unless......

http://www.firetown.com/2010/10/05/the-twin-towers-were-virtually-empty-and-asbestos-condemned/

The Twin Towers Were Virtually Empty And Asbestos Condemned

“Explicitly included in the agreement was that Silverstein and Westfield ‘were given the right to rebuild the structures if they were destroyed.’’

“In this transaction, Silverstein signed a rental contract for the WTC over 99 years amounting to 3.2 billion dollars in installments to be made to the Port Authority: 800 million covered fees including a down payment of the order of 100 million dollars. Of this amount, Silverstein put in 14 million dollars of his own money. The annual payment on the lease was of the order of 115 million dollars.

“In the wake of the WTC attacks, Silverstein is suing for some $7.1 billion in insurance money, double the amount of the value of the 99 year lease.” In fact, some $5 billion was actually returned, given the multiple court-case protests of the insurers.

The real bottom line was that the Towers were two financial white elephants. And both Silverstein and Greenberg had to know that. The tenancy was dropping. They were out of date. And most dangerously, they were asbestos bombs, loaded with the dangerous building material when they were completed in 1972-73.

By law the buildings could not be taken down by internal demolition. And since it would cost a billion dollars or more to take the towers down beam by beam, it would be at great loss to the Port of Authority or its leaseholder. Thus the reasons are obvious to take WTC down in act of terror also a false-flag operation. Remember, the concept for the WTC Towers originated with the Nelson and David Rockefeller, members of the Council on Foreign Relations and among the world’s elites. A “New Pearl Harbor” would serve those interests well.

Salinsky wrote:

Maybe, you need to look for one of these at the yard sales ...[/font]

It's really a coincidence you mention that, Sal.

A couple of months ago, my yard sale partner bought two of those contraptions which were still new in the box at a yard sale I wasn't at. The only difference is his are square in shape. He gave ten bucks apiece for them.
At the time, I hinted to him that I wanted one. But the stingy bastard kept both of them for himself.
Over time I kept working on him and I was close to getting him to give in and let me have one of them.
But about that time, the one he'd set up for himself got blown away and damaged when a big wind came through. So that ended my chance of getting the second one.
So, yes, I'm on the hunt for one.

But by the time I find one, it'll probably be cool weather and the little vampires will go into hiding again and I won't need it till next year.

I'm not ignoring your posts, teo. I just had a visitor show up.
I'll respond to it all later.

One last question for Sal.  Since you have warm weather all year long,  does that mean you have to put up with those bloodsuckers all year long?
Up here they go away in the fall and don't come back till the spring.
Hell,  that alone would be the deal killer on me living any further south from here.

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

Okay,  I'm back for a minute.  And I do have time to respond to this one.  But give me more time on the rest cause the lady's coming over to watch the Wrastlemania with me while we have dinner and I still have to go to the store to get a couple of baked potatoes.  I had a sack of potatoes but just looked and those are so old they've grown arms and legs on em.  
I was tempted to give her a baked potato with arms and legs on it just to get her reaction .  But then I remembered the last time I got a little crazy with the food shtick. We were at Steak n Shake and on the way out I grabbed some french fries off some strangers leftover plate on another table and ate em.   That didn't get the reaction from her that I was looking for.  It turned from a comedy movie to a horror movie right quick.  lol

But anyway about this graphic you put up.  

Is this the message it sends?  That since,  at the time they built the Twin Towers,  they were bragging about the fire-retardant quality of asbestos,  that this is the proof that the airliner collision fires would have been contained by the asbestos?  And so that proves those fires could not have caused the towers to collapse?  Is that it.

Okay well if that's the point of the thing, this is my response.

The collisions of the airliners displaced (knocked away) the fire-proofing material protecting the steel floor girders,  the girders under the concrete floor slabs.  Investigation following the collapses found those girders with the insulation displaced.

The rest of the asbestos in the building, like in the wall structures or wherever,  has no bearing on anything.  
Because all it took was for the fire-proofing material to be gone from the floor girders at the points of impact.   Without the fire-proofing material protecting them,  the floor girders were heated by the fires.

There is a universally accepted fact which then comes into play.  Not something made up by Larry Silverstein or Dick Cheney or Count Rothschild or the Council on Foreign relations or even the Jews.  But a fact known to everyone even remotely associated with the field of metallurgy.  But apparently unknown to Alex Jones or any other truther making youtubes.  Which is  that steel warps and sags at temperatures produced by the heat of an aviation fuel fire.  

SO, the floor girders began to sag.  Photos were taken from a helicopter before the tower collapsed.  And those photos looking through the windows of the tower show those floor slabs were distorted into a curved shape.
I've posted those photos in countless discussions I've had with you.

The floor girders were attached (with rivets) to the tower's perimeter columns.
That was the steel framework (cage) surrounding it which also contributed to holding up the building.
The sag made the floor girders want to pull away from the perimeter columns.  And finally,  the floor girders broke away from where they were riveted.

That initiated the collapse.  The enormous in weight concrete floor slab had no way to go but down.  And then it took the next slab below it down with it.    And the next and the next and the next.

So that graphic is just a total non-sequiter.  It's evidence of nothing.

Salinsky wrote:Sheesh, Bob ...

... I don't even get into this truther bullshit, and I got what he was saying with that graphic better than you did.

That is PROOF that the towers were chalk full of asbestos, so they were as worthless as burned out tenement buildings in downtown Detroit, so that crafty old JEW conspired to bring them down and collect all that sweet, sweet insurance dough, because that's how those crafty old JEWS roll.

Amirite, T??

ROFLMAO.   Beautifully executed.  Every word of it.

Yes I understand that part of the claim being made.
But my reply was particularly in response to what is written in the caption below the photograph...

"asbesto contains fire,  cannot burn,  and holds up after metal and glass have melted down".

That's all well and good.  Actually from my own personal work experience,  I can vouch for how useful asbestos is as a heat and fire retardant myself.
All those 1940's Wurlitzer jukeboxes with the bubbling tubes in them work this way.  A glass tube filled with carbon tetrachloride is seated into a big old-timey resistor with a hole in it for the tube.  When voltage is supplied to the resistor,  that son of a bitch gets as hot as a stove burner.  And that boils the carbon tet in the glass tube.  Carbon tet when boiled makes big bubbles that slowly rise inside the tube.
To keep the hot resistor from burning up the inside of the wooden jukebox cabinet,  the tube is surrounded by asbestos.  
BUT,  I've found examples of the jukeboxes where the operator was negligent and let the asbestos pads deteriorate and fall out.
On one of those,  the whole bottom of the front door of the thing had caught fire and burned.  I had to throw that door away.  And a replacement door for a 1946 jukebox aint easy to find so the whole thing pissed me off.

But exactly the same principle as what happened to that jukebox also applies to the Twin Towers.
Which is that,  yes,  asbestos is wonderful and all.  BUT,  when it aint there no more,  it won't do shit.
And it was no longer on those floor girders just like it was no longer on that fucking jukebox resistor.

Bob has kicked every challenger's arguments on 911 truthers fantasy. He is the 400 lb Gorilla on these issues and sadly NOBODY has ever been able to make a lucid argument. Most of the truther movement is just the same old antisemitism of the middle ages. Facts and diligence has made Bob the forum king of the hill on this issue, and poor T keeps trying to knock him off the top, and he just tumbles down the hill again and again.......

Actually that whole response needs some context.

The reason I put so much emphasis on the girders sagging from the heat is because of this.  
The truther movement is now more than ten years old.  And for that whole ten years,  one of the biggest "gotcha" things they offer as the proof that the buildings had to be blown up is...

"steel won't melt at temperatures resulting from an aviation fuel fire".

For that whole ten years,  a countless number of debunkers has tried to tell them that this has no relevance to what happened.  And tried to explain to them that it's the sagging that came into play and the sagging not only can result from much lower temperatures but we can actually see the sagging in the goddamn photographs.

But every time they're told this,  they come right back with...

"steel won't melt at temperatures resulting from an aviation fuel fire".

They're like parrots.  Parrots don't really comprehend the english words they hear.  And when you try to explain something to a parrot,  it never hears or understands that,  it just comes back with the same old thing "polly wanna cracker".  Over and over.

Salinsky wrote: the vermin are like swarms of blood sucking sparrows.

That's my take too.  

And that's why it's not really the mooslims or the mexicans or the blacks or the jews or the queers or isis or dick cheney or barack obama or Trump or any other human being (maybe with only the exception of Steve Doocy) who is the enemy we need to be worrying about.

I don't see Cheney or Count Rotschchild or Osama Bin Laden or Jews or anything of the kind lurking around in my fucking backyard just waiting to stick a shiv in me and suck my blood.

If the mooslims and the jews and cheney and rothschild could all get together, goddamnit we all have a common enemy. We need to stop fighting with ourselves and fight that.

And it just hit me.  These bastards are using biological weapons on us.  
They inject us with that West Nile virus.  And there are current cases of it right here in Escambia County.  And that's just for openers because they have plenty of other diseases in their arsenal and some of those are deadly.

Saddam Hussein used biological weapons too,  but he sure didn't use em on us.  Hell, these fuckers have been using them on us for centuries and we aint declared war on them yet.