CHRISTOFER BOLLYN
This photograph from the Hugo Neu Schnitzer East (HNSE) scrapyard shows Professor Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl of U.C. Berkeley's school of engineering inspecting what he described as an interior column with what he wrote were "very clear signs of a large, round, and fast moving object entering the left side of the box and cutting a quarter of a circle hole in the column." Astaneh-Asl called this bite out of the core column a "huge bullet hole."
Was the hole in the column made by the depleted uranium tipped missile that made a bright white flash as it penetrated the tower wall? What else besides a white-hot D.U. warhead could have had the energy to cut such a hole in a core column?
Did the column cause the deflection seen in the two smoking pieces of the D.U. missile seen flying out of the South Tower? The white flaming object leaving black smoke appears to be the D.U. warhead. Is this the real smoking gun?
Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl
Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl from the University of California at Berkeley and graduate student Qiuhong Zhao went to New York City on a grant from the National Science Foundation to collect data on the mechanical and structural properties of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers, particulary steel affected by heat, fire and impact.History Commons has a page documenting the statements of Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl about the steel debris removed from the World Trade Center. I called Astaneh-Asl at his home on 5 April 2011 to ask about the hole he had expressed great interest in. He told me that he had not saved the piece of steel, which he wrote "arose a lot of interest", and that he had simply allowed it to be "recycled". Why would an engineer working on a grant from the National Science Foundation allow such an interesting piece of evidence to be simply destroyed without photographing and documenting it carefully? This could very well be the "bullet hole" caused by the depleted uranium tipped missile that was seen hitting and exiting the South Tower.
Here is part of their comments from what they said on September 11, 2001 on PBS Newshour about what they thought had caused the towers to collapse:
All the best wishes for 2011, which I hope will be a great year for 9/11 truth.
This morning, the first thing I did, even before getting out of my pajamas, was examine a photo that has bothered me for some time (as it sits on my desk). It is the attached photo (No. 0879 from the Here is New York website).
Photo 0879 from Here is New York website shows the view from the North of the plane striking South Tower.
Both planes were guided to fly directly into secure computer rooms in which large amounts of thermate could have been concealed in phony battery arrays like this. The white-hot penetrator of a depleted uranium warhead would have detonated the thermate, creating the spectacular fireballs and destroying the aircraft - and the evidence.
The spectacular explosions on the 81st floor that accompanied the impact of the planes were apparently created with thermate incendiaries containing barium nitrate, which would explain the light orange flame and white smoke.
The large amount of molten metal (apparently iron) cascading from the 81st floor indicates that tons of thermate (an incendiary form of thermite) had been placed in the computer room into which the plane flew. See Thermite in the World Trade Center - The Censored Evidence
A missile fired from a pod under the fuselage can be seen in images of the plane striking the South Tower. The missile (which appears in lower left photo to have a trail with a diameter of about 1 meter) would have had much greater velocity than the aircraft penetrating the tower. If this missile exceeded the speed of sound did it cause the sonic boom reportedly heard by witnesses?
The aircraft said to be Flight 175 hit 23 of the 59 steel columns (14-inch box columns) spaced about 26 inches apart (3' 4" on center). The perimeter steel columns, cross beams (52-inch spandrel plates), and concrete floors would have arrested the forward movement of the plane. While an engine could have broken loose from the wing, it would have lost most of its forward momentum, especially after breaking through three 14-inch wide steel box columns. Source: World Trade Center Building Performance Study, FEMA
Note that the nose of the plane struck the 81st floor slab and spandrel, which would have cut the fuselage in half lengthwise. The only parts of the plane that would have been on or above floor 81 would have been the right wing and engine, a slice of the fuselage, and the vertical fin. (This NIST diagram shows the right engine hitting the spandrel of the 82nd floor, which means that the engine thought to have flown right through the tower would have first broken through the spandrel and three columns as well as through the 4-inch concrete floor, its steel pan and dense trusswork - edgewise. This is extremely unlikely, if not impossible. Furthermore, the main landing gear stowed under the fuselage would have entered and passed through the building on the 80th floor (or lower). The left engine and wing would have entered the tower on the 79th floor. Source: NIST Report on the World Trade Center
The actual aircraft that supposedly hit the South Tower and its landing gear...
which fold up beneath the fuselage during flight. (The missile object is circled.)
How the landing gear tuck up into the fuselage during flight. Source: NIST
There was no evidence of a hole on the 79th or 80th floors through which the landing gear could have passed. The space between the columns is only 26 inches (65 cm) wide. There is no possible way that the landing gear passed through the 80th floor of the South Tower and flew some 400 meters - burning white-hot. The government claim that it did appears to be nothing but a bold-faced lie to cover up the photographic evidence of a uranium-tipped missile.
There is no structural damage to the columns of the 80th or 79th floors that would indicate that the aircraft's landing gear passed through the building. This is additional proof that the white-hot burning object is certainly not the landing gear. Nearly all of the structural damage appears to have occurred on the 81st floor, where only the right engine, part of the right wing, and a slice of the fuselage entered - possibly along with the missile. The 81st floor, where most of the explosive/fire damage clearly occurred, is exactly the floor on which the phony battery arrays were located. The Fuji Bank occupied floors 79-82. I spoke with Stanley Praimnath, who worked on the 81st floor, to learn more about the possibility of a large amount of thermate being placed on that floor. He told me that there was a large number of computers and backup batteries on the 81st floor, but that the batteries were never turned on. See "Christopher Bollyn interviews Stanley Praimnath, A survivor of the 9/11 attack on the 81st floor of the South Tower"
The 14-inch box columns and 52-inch spandrel plates, the 4-inch thick concrete floors and their steel pans and trusses, and the massive core columns would have prevented the wreckage of the plane from passing through the building.
The exterior column construction showing the floor pan trusswork. The exterior wall construction was extremely strong and would have destroyed the plane and stopped the wreckage from passing through the building. A 767 engine has a diameter of about 9 feet (94" - 115") and would have had to pass through at least three steel columns - on both sides of the building. It is simply not possible for a jet engine flying between 666-800 kph (414-500 mph) to break through two walls of steel columns and fly another 450 meters. The best estimate for the maximum speed of Flight 175, however, (if an unmodified Boeing 767) is 360 knots, i.e. 185.2 meters/second or 414.36 mph. Was the data manipulated to explain the high velocity objects that passed through the South Tower or was the plane a modified 767? In any case, the engine found at the corner of Murray and Church Streets apparently came from a missile with higher velocity than a normal Boeing 767 flying at maximum speed at sea level. Source: World Trade Center Building Performance Study, FEMA
The white-hot burning object (seen on right) shows the characteristics of a depleted uranium penetrator. The dense uranium penetrator obviously has much greater velocity and would have acted as the detonator for the thermate explosion that ignited the jet fuel. The buildings were about 64 meters (209 feet) on each side. In this photo, the white burning object has passed through the steel-framed tower and flown about 150 meters further. There are no parts of a Boeing 767 that would burn white-hot like this. Did this white-hot burning object crash into another building or did it land on the street, like the engine on the corner of Murray and Church streets?
The FEMA report said the engine and (landing gear) from Flight 175 landed about 1,725 feet (525 meters) from the point of impact with the wall of the South Tower. The engine flew about 450 meters after passing through the tower. The arc of the falling engine suggests that it had a velocity of about 57-60 meters/second (205-216 km/hour) after breaking through at least three 14-inch steel box columns in the south wall, the 64-meter wide tower, and more columns in the north wall.
The two objects seen flying out of the South Tower were moving significantly faster than Bobby Hull's famous slapshot (clocked at 118.3 mph or 190.4 km/h), the fastest in the history of ice hockey. This suggests that these objects had greater velocity entering the building than the aircraft's reported speed of 800 km/hour. The government's claim that UA 175 was flying 800 km/hour is challenged by the fact that an unmodified Boeing 767 has a maximum speed of only 360 knots (666 km/hour) at sea level. Therefore, either the reported speed (NTSB) is not correct - or we are talking about a modified 767, or both.
The light orange flame and white smoke of the fireball coming from the entry hole on the South Tower are indicative of thermate explosions while the darker orange flames and soot are evidently from the burning jet fuel. Both planes flew into secure computer rooms in which large amounts of thermate could have been placed. The thermate explosions would have destroyed most of the aircraft. Although the more durable landing gear and engines were reportedly recovered from Flight 175, they were not identified by their many numbered time-tracked parts.
The unidentified engine found on the corner of Murray and Church Streets. This appears to a part from a small engine, less than 1 meter in diameter, and may be only 2 feet depending on the length of the carpenter's square that has been laid on top. If this is the high velocity object that is seen leaving the white smoke, it is probably not from the aircraft - but the missile. It is too small and flew too far after hitting the South Tower.
The white-hot burning object evidently hit the Burlington Coat Factory on Park Place (in red circle). We are told that the building was hit by parts of the landing gear and fuselage of Flight 175 but no photos of these parts were presented. The Wikipedia article on the Burlington Coat Factory building says this: "In 2001, in the 9/11 attacks after hijacked Flight 175 penetrated through a tower of the World Trade Center, part of the plane's landing gear and fuselage came out the north side of the tower and crashed through the roof and two of the floors of the Burlington Coat Factory at 45–47 Park Place, between West Broadway and Church Street, (600 feet or 180 meters) north of the former World Trade Center (edge of property). The plane parts destroyed three floor beams, and severely compromised the building's internal structure." The only problem is that the landing gear of a Boeing aircraft would not burn white-hot and would probably not carry that far. The damage to the Burlington building was not caused by landing gear. No landing gear was seen flying in that direction.
The engine that landed on the corner of Murray Street flew an estimated 1,725 feet (525 meters) after hitting the wall of the South Tower (at a height of about 300 meters). It is highly unlikely that a 767 jet engine, even from an aircraft supposedly flying 800 km/hour* (about 223 meters/second) could fly that far after passing through a very densely framed steel building like the tower. (Maximum speed for a Boeing 767 at sea level is 360 knots or 666 km/hour.) Most (if not all) of the aircraft did not even pass through the tower. Source: Jon CarlsonThe two objects that are seen in the second photo have long been of great interest to me. I think (and have written) that the object seen leaving the blackish trail of oxides is the depleted uranium warhead, which Marion Fulk, a former scientist at Livermore Lab, also thought was possible.
The two objects showing incredible inertia are seen in this photo. Note the difference in their oxide trails. The white-hot object leaving the black oxides is probably the depleted uranium penetrator while the object leaving the white trail is probably the engine and fuel that propelled the missile.
The two objects that have incredible velocity are way out in front (of the parts of the aircraft) as can be seen in this photo...
and the DU penetrator burning white-hot and leaving behind its trail of dark oxides is clearly seen in this photo.
With many thanks and all the best wishes for 2011,
Christopher Bollyn
The 1945 crash of a B-25 bomber allows for some comparison on the structural damage to the different towers.
Note: I have written about the evidence that DU-tipped missiles were fired into each tower before impact by the planes since 2004, after having learned about the characteristics of depleted uranium from Doug Rokke and Marion Fulk.
Marion Fulk, former staff scientist from the Manhattan Project and Star Wars program, tutored Bollyn on the properties and dangers of depleted uranium at his home in Livermore, California. Fulk said he felt obliged to inform the public about the dangers of uranium to human health.
Were DU Missiles used on the World Trade Center?
by Christopher Bollyn
23 October 2004
The video, "911: In Plane Site," by Dave von Kleist, examines the video evidence and shows that there was a white flash before United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 11 struck the towers.
In the case of the South Tower, the von Kleist video shows the underside of the plane, seen from from four different cameras and angles, with a cylindrical pod and a mysterious white object being fired from the pod before the plane hits the tower. This object impacts the tower before the plane, creating a bright flash.A similar white flash can be seen in the video, made by the Naudet brothers, of Flight 11 crashing into the North Tower.
The white flashes are similar to the flashes that are seen when depleted uranium (DU) penetrators hits their target. DU is a spontaneous pyrophoric material, i.e. it inflames when reaching its target generating such heat that it explodes. (More correctly stated, a pyrophoric substance is a reactive metal, like uranium, that will ignite spontaneously in air.)
If DU missiles preceded the impacts of Flights 175 and 11, then there is the question of what happened to the DU penetrators? One would expect that they traveled through the towers and carried on into the streets of New York or into other buildings.
Unless they impacted sufficiently dense objects to stop them, they should have continued through the buildings, and be seen flying ahead of the flames and debris. After all, uranium is 1.7 times more dense than lead.
A photo in Eric Hufschmid's book "Painful Questions" [p. 39, seen above] shows two objects passing through the South Tower, ahead of the flames. One of them displays the characterics of burning uranium [see above photos].
In the main photo, seen below, two objects are visible passing through the South Tower. One is black and leaving a white smoke trail; the other is burning with a bright white flame and leaving a black trail.
The color of the flame and the color of the oxides [smoke] are important. The color of the flame indicates the substance that is burning and its temperature. The bright white flame is indicative of a reactive metal, such as magnesium or uranium.
I contacted Marion Fulk, a former staff scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Lab, to ask about the photos seen below. After studying the photos, I asked Fulk if the object in the photo could be uranium.
"Yes," Fulk said, "It is possible." Asked if the black smoke could be uranium oxides, Fulk said, "Yes, it could be uranium oxide."
Fulk went on to describe the "dirty" olive green, brown, and black colors of the 21 different phases of uranium oxide.
The gap between the burning object and the black smoke trail was explained by Leuren Moret, geo-scientist and international radiation expert, who said that the gap is where the uranium gas and vapors are so hot they are still invisible. As the vapors cool, they condense into visible uranium oxides.
Asked how the piece of uranium could be burning so hot, Moret explained that some of the kinetic energy from the uranium missile would be converted into heat.
If this is a DU penetrator, it could explain Moret's claim that the World Trade Center rubble was radioactive.
Were DU missiles used to ignite the fuel in the airplanes to create the spectacular explosions that were used to explain the pre-planned demolition of the twin towers?
He showed this video about the possibility that uranium was used during the attack at the WTC and the Pentagon: www.erichufschmid.net/ForBollynsSpeech23Oct2004.wmv
The photo below from the Pentagon clean-up shows the extensive decontamination procedures that were followed after 9/11. Such procedures and precautions were not done at the World Trade Center. What were the people at the Pentagon so concerned about? Was the site hot from depleted uranium?
United Air Lines Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret.) was Pilot in Command (PIC) on each of the UAL aircraft that were supposedly used on the event on 9/11 - multiple times. He flew the actual B-767 that hit the South Tower (UA 175) and the B-757 that supposedly crashed at Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19732
"WTC Jet Engine Confirmed NOT From Boeing 767", by Jon Carlson, April 4, 2005
http://www.rense.com/general63/wtcc.htm
Bollyn, Christopher, "Understanding the Use of Thermite on 9/11", July 14, 2009
http://www.bollyn.com/understanding-the-use-of-thermite-on-9-11
Bollyn, Christopher, "9/11 Planes Flew Directly into Secure Computer Rooms in Both Towers," January 11, 2007
The "Huge Bullet Hole" in the South Tower and Analysis of Missile Evidence
Updated - April 17, 2011This photograph from the Hugo Neu Schnitzer East (HNSE) scrapyard shows Professor Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl of U.C. Berkeley's school of engineering inspecting what he described as an interior column with what he wrote were "very clear signs of a large, round, and fast moving object entering the left side of the box and cutting a quarter of a circle hole in the column." Astaneh-Asl called this bite out of the core column a "huge bullet hole."
Was the hole in the column made by the depleted uranium tipped missile that made a bright white flash as it penetrated the tower wall? What else besides a white-hot D.U. warhead could have had the energy to cut such a hole in a core column?
Did the column cause the deflection seen in the two smoking pieces of the D.U. missile seen flying out of the South Tower? The white flaming object leaving black smoke appears to be the D.U. warhead. Is this the real smoking gun?
Dr. Astenah-Asl said that it appeared that this column came from the South Tower. Judging by the thickness of the steel, it could very well be from the impact level of the tower. The fast moving round object that cut the hole appears to have had a diameter of about 3 or 4 feet (90-120 cm). Was this hole cut by the depleted uranium-tipped missile that was seen coming out of the South Tower ahead of the explosion? (Source: Astaneh Final Report)
Glenda Cooper of The Washington Post wrote more about the mysterious "huge bullet hole" and other evidence of a "very fast" object that went through the tower like "a butter knife" discovered by Astaneh-Asl on October 6, 2001:
Glenda Cooper of The Washington Post wrote more about the mysterious "huge bullet hole" and other evidence of a "very fast" object that went through the tower like "a butter knife" discovered by Astaneh-Asl on October 6, 2001:
The girders and beams provide evidence that far from disintegrating on impact, the plane that hit the South Tower penetrated to the building's core. One beam from the outer part of the building is buckled and twisted but with a sharp grooved line running along it, which Astaneh-Asl believes was caused by the wing of the aircraft slicing through. "There is a very clear line here," he said today during a news conference. "It looks like a butter knife has gone through it and left a nice clear line. This can only happen if something very fast hits it."
Similar lines are on a column from the interior of the South Tower, which has what looks like a smooth bite taken out of two sides. On the first side (the side of impact) the hole is almost uniformly smooth from when the plane tore through. The second inner side is more ragged, from the plane encountering resistance from the metal.
"Before, no one knew what happened to the columns inside, in the elevator shaft and the stairwell," said Astaneh-Asl. "Now we know the plane went through and sheared off part of the columns and took a bite out of it, leaving what looks like a huge bullet hole. The bite we see is the curve of the engine or the fuselage." (But the radius of this hole is less than 2 feet! C.B.)
Similar lines are on a column from the interior of the South Tower, which has what looks like a smooth bite taken out of two sides. On the first side (the side of impact) the hole is almost uniformly smooth from when the plane tore through. The second inner side is more ragged, from the plane encountering resistance from the metal.
"Before, no one knew what happened to the columns inside, in the elevator shaft and the stairwell," said Astaneh-Asl. "Now we know the plane went through and sheared off part of the columns and took a bite out of it, leaving what looks like a huge bullet hole. The bite we see is the curve of the engine or the fuselage." (But the radius of this hole is less than 2 feet! C.B.)
Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl
Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl from the University of California at Berkeley and graduate student Qiuhong Zhao went to New York City on a grant from the National Science Foundation to collect data on the mechanical and structural properties of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers, particulary steel affected by heat, fire and impact.
Astaneh wanted to know what I thought had caused the collapse of the Twin Towers. When I told him that I thought the towers had been demolished with explosives including Thermite and a nano-composite of thermite, he began to attack me saying that I was wasting my time and hurting the feelings of the victims' relatives. When I asked him about Dr. Steven E. Jones' discovery of chips of nano-thermite in the dust of the towers, Astaneh dismissed it, saying that Jones is not an engineer.
Astaneh then responded to my email request:
Dear Mr. Bollyn: As I clearly stated in our phone conversation a few minutes ago, I am very disturbed by the people such as yourself , who are part of this "Conspiracy theorist" regarding World Trade Center collapse. These people have used my name and research results in totally incorrect way , and in completely opposite way of what the research results had indicated. By doing so, you and all others have implied that our research somehow support your totally incorrect theories.
I hereby officially notify you in writing that if you use my name or the results of our research in any publication implying that the data that we have collected on the WTC somehow supports or provides you with evidence in support of your totally base less conspiracy theories, I reserve the right to take any legal action necessary to protect my reputation as well as integrity of my research.
Let me state again that after 6 years of studying the collapse of World Trade Center, I have not found any evidence to support any of the claims of "conspiracy theorists".
In my opinion, and based on scientific facts, the only cause of collapse was the structural and fire damage to the towers that had many unusual features and were not designed according to the buildings codes, standards and the practice.
A. Astaneh, Professor
I hereby officially notify you in writing that if you use my name or the results of our research in any publication implying that the data that we have collected on the WTC somehow supports or provides you with evidence in support of your totally base less conspiracy theories, I reserve the right to take any legal action necessary to protect my reputation as well as integrity of my research.
Let me state again that after 6 years of studying the collapse of World Trade Center, I have not found any evidence to support any of the claims of "conspiracy theorists".
In my opinion, and based on scientific facts, the only cause of collapse was the structural and fire damage to the towers that had many unusual features and were not designed according to the buildings codes, standards and the practice.
A. Astaneh, Professor
It should be noted that Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl and Ronald O. Hamburger of Simpson Gumpertz & Heger (which does a lot of work for the U.S. military) were two of the first structural engineers interviewed on 9/11 about what caused the collapse of the Twin Towers. Hamburger joined SGH in 2002 from the EQE structural engineering division of ABS Consulting, a risk management consulting company, where he was Senior Vice President and Chief Structural Engineer. Hamburger previously worked for Bechtel as an Assistant Chief Civil/Structural Engineer.
Both Hamburger and Astaneh-Asl agreed that the towers collapsed due to fire. Hamburger went on to play a key role in the FEMA 9/11 investigation of the World Trade Center. One has to wonder why PBS chose to interview these two men to talk about the collapses and if their opinions had anything to do with their future work on the 9/11 investigation.Here is part of their comments from what they said on September 11, 2001 on PBS Newshour about what they thought had caused the towers to collapse:
ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Those twin towers, which were completed in 1973 were 110 stories tall, 1,360 feet. They were the tallest buildings in New York City, roughly 50,000 people work in them. They were designed to be a hub for international trade and were part of a seven-building complex, which was completed in 1988. In addition to the twin towers, one other of the seven buildings in the World Trade Center complex also collapsed late this afternoon.
For more on the buildings we turn now to two structural engineers, Ron Hamburger, chief structural engineer at UQE, an engineering firm, and Hassan Astaneh, professor of engineering at UC Berkeley who is helping develop guidelines for the American Institute for Steel Construction, guidelines that would help structures withstand terrorist attack. Ron Hamburger, you've seen the video and the plane hitting. You've seen the fires and the collapse. What do you think happened?
RON HAMBURGER: Well, incredible as it may seem, the buildings survived the aircraft attack. Both of them were able to stand for the better part of two hours after the crash. What they just were not able to survive was the incredibly intense fires that ensued from all of that burning jet fuel. Structural steel, these buildings were steel billings. Structural steel when it gets hot loses strength. The steel elements that held up the building where the crash occurred got hot from the fires at about the 90th floor. They were supporting 20 floors of building above it. And when they lost the ability to support that, all of that mass, like another building, came down on top of the rest of the structure like a pile hammer and just essentially drove the rest of the building into the ground.
ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Now, we don't know for sure, do we, that, Mr. Astaneh... We don't know for sure that there wasn't some kind of a bomb. But you didn't think there had to be a bomb for this happen?
HASSAN ASTANEH: That's exactly case. We are not sure, of course, what was in those planes but the amount of fuel that came and was delivered to this building was enough, in my opinion, as I agree with Ron, that the cause of this collapse and tragedy was really what we call progress of collapse. What happened here was the initial impact did not cause much damage; it just ignited the fire. The fuel was supplied. The fire on almost four hours - and at that time the temperature of the columns - they have reached the critical level which is 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, and when steel reaches that level of temperature, it loses its strength, and of course the upper floors, the weight of those upper floors completely collapsed on the lower part and hammered it down and collapsed it.
End of updated section; original article begins here:For more on the buildings we turn now to two structural engineers, Ron Hamburger, chief structural engineer at UQE, an engineering firm, and Hassan Astaneh, professor of engineering at UC Berkeley who is helping develop guidelines for the American Institute for Steel Construction, guidelines that would help structures withstand terrorist attack. Ron Hamburger, you've seen the video and the plane hitting. You've seen the fires and the collapse. What do you think happened?
RON HAMBURGER: Well, incredible as it may seem, the buildings survived the aircraft attack. Both of them were able to stand for the better part of two hours after the crash. What they just were not able to survive was the incredibly intense fires that ensued from all of that burning jet fuel. Structural steel, these buildings were steel billings. Structural steel when it gets hot loses strength. The steel elements that held up the building where the crash occurred got hot from the fires at about the 90th floor. They were supporting 20 floors of building above it. And when they lost the ability to support that, all of that mass, like another building, came down on top of the rest of the structure like a pile hammer and just essentially drove the rest of the building into the ground.
ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Now, we don't know for sure, do we, that, Mr. Astaneh... We don't know for sure that there wasn't some kind of a bomb. But you didn't think there had to be a bomb for this happen?
HASSAN ASTANEH: That's exactly case. We are not sure, of course, what was in those planes but the amount of fuel that came and was delivered to this building was enough, in my opinion, as I agree with Ron, that the cause of this collapse and tragedy was really what we call progress of collapse. What happened here was the initial impact did not cause much damage; it just ignited the fire. The fuel was supplied. The fire on almost four hours - and at that time the temperature of the columns - they have reached the critical level which is 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, and when steel reaches that level of temperature, it loses its strength, and of course the upper floors, the weight of those upper floors completely collapsed on the lower part and hammered it down and collapsed it.
This article began as a New Year's letter (in italics) to 9/11 researcher Dr. Steven E. Jones, which I decided to make an open letter:
Dear Professor Jones,All the best wishes for 2011, which I hope will be a great year for 9/11 truth.
This morning, the first thing I did, even before getting out of my pajamas, was examine a photo that has bothered me for some time (as it sits on my desk). It is the attached photo (No. 0879 from the Here is New York website).
Photo 0879 from Here is New York website shows the view from the North of the plane striking South Tower.
What bothers me is the fact that the fireballs seem to be exploding much too quickly to be merely jet fuel. As you know, I am of the opinion that depleted uranium tipped missiles preceded the entry of each plane, by a few milliseconds of impact. This is apparently what caused the white flash seen as each plane impacted the tower. The depleted uranium warhead would have created a super-heated space inside the tower which would have detonated any pre-placed thermate charges on the floor (for example in the large "battery" racks in the computer room, which were "never turned on," according to a person who worked there) and ignited the dispersed jet fuel. The DU-tipped missile was the trigger of the spectacular fireballs witnessed by millions.
Both planes were guided to fly directly into secure computer rooms in which large amounts of thermate could have been concealed in phony battery arrays like this. The white-hot penetrator of a depleted uranium warhead would have detonated the thermate, creating the spectacular fireballs and destroying the aircraft - and the evidence.From my article "9/11 Planes Flew Directly into Secure Computer Rooms in Both Towers" -
Then, suddenly, out of the blue, a former bank employee came forward, a person who had visited the 81st floor on a weekly basis. His information explains more than he probably thought and provides us with a major clue about what really happened on 9/11.
Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor, he said, and stripped it down to the bare bone to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.
These units were bolted to the raised floor which stood about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. Beneath the raised floor ran the cables and power supply that connected the army of batteries. IT techies had to get down on all fours and crawl around beneath the raised floor to connect cables.
"The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9/11, he said.
But were they really batteries?
"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."
So, what really was on the 81st floor of WTC 2? What was in these heavy "battery-looking things?" Were they batteries, or were they Thermite?
- "9/11 Planes Flew Directly into Secure Computer Rooms in Both Towers", January 11, 2007
Then, suddenly, out of the blue, a former bank employee came forward, a person who had visited the 81st floor on a weekly basis. His information explains more than he probably thought and provides us with a major clue about what really happened on 9/11.
Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor, he said, and stripped it down to the bare bone to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.
These units were bolted to the raised floor which stood about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. Beneath the raised floor ran the cables and power supply that connected the army of batteries. IT techies had to get down on all fours and crawl around beneath the raised floor to connect cables.
"The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9/11, he said.
But were they really batteries?
"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."
So, what really was on the 81st floor of WTC 2? What was in these heavy "battery-looking things?" Were they batteries, or were they Thermite?
- "9/11 Planes Flew Directly into Secure Computer Rooms in Both Towers", January 11, 2007
The spectacular explosions on the 81st floor that accompanied the impact of the planes were apparently created with thermate incendiaries containing barium nitrate, which would explain the light orange flame and white smoke. The large amount of molten metal (apparently iron) cascading from the 81st floor indicates that tons of thermate (an incendiary form of thermite) had been placed in the computer room into which the plane flew. See Thermite in the World Trade Center - The Censored EvidenceA missile fired from a pod under the fuselage can be seen in images of the plane striking the South Tower. The missile (which appears in lower left photo to have a trail with a diameter of about 1 meter) would have had much greater velocity than the aircraft penetrating the tower. If this missile exceeded the speed of sound did it cause the sonic boom reportedly heard by witnesses?
The aircraft said to be Flight 175 hit 23 of the 59 steel columns (14-inch box columns) spaced about 26 inches apart (3' 4" on center). The perimeter steel columns, cross beams (52-inch spandrel plates), and concrete floors would have arrested the forward movement of the plane. While an engine could have broken loose from the wing, it would have lost most of its forward momentum, especially after breaking through three 14-inch wide steel box columns. Source: World Trade Center Building Performance Study, FEMA
Note that the nose of the plane struck the 81st floor slab and spandrel, which would have cut the fuselage in half lengthwise. The only parts of the plane that would have been on or above floor 81 would have been the right wing and engine, a slice of the fuselage, and the vertical fin. (This NIST diagram shows the right engine hitting the spandrel of the 82nd floor, which means that the engine thought to have flown right through the tower would have first broken through the spandrel and three columns as well as through the 4-inch concrete floor, its steel pan and dense trusswork - edgewise. This is extremely unlikely, if not impossible. Furthermore, the main landing gear stowed under the fuselage would have entered and passed through the building on the 80th floor (or lower). The left engine and wing would have entered the tower on the 79th floor. Source: NIST Report on the World Trade Center
The actual aircraft that supposedly hit the South Tower and its landing gear...
which fold up beneath the fuselage during flight. (The missile object is circled.)
How the landing gear tuck up into the fuselage during flight. Source: NIST
There was no evidence of a hole on the 79th or 80th floors through which the landing gear could have passed. The space between the columns is only 26 inches (65 cm) wide. There is no possible way that the landing gear passed through the 80th floor of the South Tower and flew some 400 meters - burning white-hot. The government claim that it did appears to be nothing but a bold-faced lie to cover up the photographic evidence of a uranium-tipped missile.
There is no structural damage to the columns of the 80th or 79th floors that would indicate that the aircraft's landing gear passed through the building. This is additional proof that the white-hot burning object is certainly not the landing gear. Nearly all of the structural damage appears to have occurred on the 81st floor, where only the right engine, part of the right wing, and a slice of the fuselage entered - possibly along with the missile. The 81st floor, where most of the explosive/fire damage clearly occurred, is exactly the floor on which the phony battery arrays were located. The Fuji Bank occupied floors 79-82. I spoke with Stanley Praimnath, who worked on the 81st floor, to learn more about the possibility of a large amount of thermate being placed on that floor. He told me that there was a large number of computers and backup batteries on the 81st floor, but that the batteries were never turned on. See "Christopher Bollyn interviews Stanley Praimnath, A survivor of the 9/11 attack on the 81st floor of the South Tower"
The 14-inch box columns and 52-inch spandrel plates, the 4-inch thick concrete floors and their steel pans and trusses, and the massive core columns would have prevented the wreckage of the plane from passing through the building.
The exterior column construction showing the floor pan trusswork. The exterior wall construction was extremely strong and would have destroyed the plane and stopped the wreckage from passing through the building. A 767 engine has a diameter of about 9 feet (94" - 115") and would have had to pass through at least three steel columns - on both sides of the building. It is simply not possible for a jet engine flying between 666-800 kph (414-500 mph) to break through two walls of steel columns and fly another 450 meters. The best estimate for the maximum speed of Flight 175, however, (if an unmodified Boeing 767) is 360 knots, i.e. 185.2 meters/second or 414.36 mph. Was the data manipulated to explain the high velocity objects that passed through the South Tower or was the plane a modified 767? In any case, the engine found at the corner of Murray and Church Streets apparently came from a missile with higher velocity than a normal Boeing 767 flying at maximum speed at sea level. Source: World Trade Center Building Performance Study, FEMA
The white-hot burning object (seen on right) shows the characteristics of a depleted uranium penetrator. The dense uranium penetrator obviously has much greater velocity and would have acted as the detonator for the thermate explosion that ignited the jet fuel. The buildings were about 64 meters (209 feet) on each side. In this photo, the white burning object has passed through the steel-framed tower and flown about 150 meters further. There are no parts of a Boeing 767 that would burn white-hot like this. Did this white-hot burning object crash into another building or did it land on the street, like the engine on the corner of Murray and Church streets?The FEMA report said the engine and (landing gear) from Flight 175 landed about 1,725 feet (525 meters) from the point of impact with the wall of the South Tower. The engine flew about 450 meters after passing through the tower. The arc of the falling engine suggests that it had a velocity of about 57-60 meters/second (205-216 km/hour) after breaking through at least three 14-inch steel box columns in the south wall, the 64-meter wide tower, and more columns in the north wall.
The two objects seen flying out of the South Tower were moving significantly faster than Bobby Hull's famous slapshot (clocked at 118.3 mph or 190.4 km/h), the fastest in the history of ice hockey. This suggests that these objects had greater velocity entering the building than the aircraft's reported speed of 800 km/hour. The government's claim that UA 175 was flying 800 km/hour is challenged by the fact that an unmodified Boeing 767 has a maximum speed of only 360 knots (666 km/hour) at sea level. Therefore, either the reported speed (NTSB) is not correct - or we are talking about a modified 767, or both.
The light orange flame and white smoke of the fireball coming from the entry hole on the South Tower are indicative of thermate explosions while the darker orange flames and soot are evidently from the burning jet fuel. Both planes flew into secure computer rooms in which large amounts of thermate could have been placed. The thermate explosions would have destroyed most of the aircraft. Although the more durable landing gear and engines were reportedly recovered from Flight 175, they were not identified by their many numbered time-tracked parts.
The unidentified engine found on the corner of Murray and Church Streets. This appears to a part from a small engine, less than 1 meter in diameter, and may be only 2 feet depending on the length of the carpenter's square that has been laid on top. If this is the high velocity object that is seen leaving the white smoke, it is probably not from the aircraft - but the missile. It is too small and flew too far after hitting the South Tower.
The white-hot burning object evidently hit the Burlington Coat Factory on Park Place (in red circle). We are told that the building was hit by parts of the landing gear and fuselage of Flight 175 but no photos of these parts were presented. The Wikipedia article on the Burlington Coat Factory building says this: "In 2001, in the 9/11 attacks after hijacked Flight 175 penetrated through a tower of the World Trade Center, part of the plane's landing gear and fuselage came out the north side of the tower and crashed through the roof and two of the floors of the Burlington Coat Factory at 45–47 Park Place, between West Broadway and Church Street, (600 feet or 180 meters) north of the former World Trade Center (edge of property). The plane parts destroyed three floor beams, and severely compromised the building's internal structure." The only problem is that the landing gear of a Boeing aircraft would not burn white-hot and would probably not carry that far. The damage to the Burlington building was not caused by landing gear. No landing gear was seen flying in that direction.
The engine that landed on the corner of Murray Street flew an estimated 1,725 feet (525 meters) after hitting the wall of the South Tower (at a height of about 300 meters). It is highly unlikely that a 767 jet engine, even from an aircraft supposedly flying 800 km/hour* (about 223 meters/second) could fly that far after passing through a very densely framed steel building like the tower. (Maximum speed for a Boeing 767 at sea level is 360 knots or 666 km/hour.) Most (if not all) of the aircraft did not even pass through the tower. Source: Jon Carlson
The two objects showing incredible inertia are seen in this photo. Note the difference in their oxide trails. The white-hot object leaving the black oxides is probably the depleted uranium penetrator while the object leaving the white trail is probably the engine and fuel that propelled the missile.
This morning it occurred to me that the second object, the one leaving the white trail, is probably the rocket burning off its unspent fuel. Since the rocket was only fired as the plane neared the tower, this rocket engine has only flown about 250 feet by the time it passes out of the tower. It certainly has the mass and velocity - and unused fuel - to be out ahead of the blast along with the DU warhead.
The two objects that have incredible velocity are way out in front (of the parts of the aircraft) as can be seen in this photo...
and the DU penetrator burning white-hot and leaving behind its trail of dark oxides is clearly seen in this photo.
Can you help me with the physics of this a little bit, or do you know anyone who can? The plane was flying about 500 mph when the rocket would have been launched from the pod beneath the body of the plane. I assume the rocket would have accelerated to about 500 mph on its own as it passed through the building. Roughly, I estimate that the heavy parts of the missile, i.e. the rocket and the DU tip, would have been going about 1,000 mph as they passed through the tower. The white hot DU tip would have been disconnected from the rocket engine and both of them may have been deflected somewhat from their original trajectory, although both are pretty much on their original course. I would assume that the more massive DU tip would be the part least deflected.
This is what I have been thinking about on the first day of 2011. I think it will be a great year. I am hot on the trail of the guys who destroyed the steel from the WTC and you know better than I why this was such an important part of the crime...With many thanks and all the best wishes for 2011,
Christopher Bollyn
The theory of pre-placement of thermate in the computer rooms into which the planes crashed at the World Trade Center is supported by the differences in the damage caused when a B-25 bomber crashed into the Empire State Building in 1945. The culprits of 9/11 knew that because large-body passenger aircraft crash into skyscrapers so rarely they could allow for spectacular Hollywood special effects like the thermate fire balls seen coming from both towers on impact. They knew there would be no test done afterwards to see if what was observed on 9/11 could be duplicated.
The 1945 crash of a B-25 bomber allows for some comparison on the structural damage to the different towers.
The force of B-25 on the building has been calculated here. It is important to note that the 15-ton bomber flying at an estimated 400 kph came to a rest 20 meters into the building. (See Bomber Crash into Empire State Building) If the plane that struck the South Tower was flying twice as fast, how far would the wreckage pass through the building? Twice as far? Given the amount of steel that blocked its passage, most of the aircraft debris would have not exited the tower on the far side. None was seen with the exception of the two objects flying out ahead of the explosion. The main reasons for placing thermate explosives in the computer rooms into which the planes were guided was probably to destroy by an extremely hot explosion as much of the plane debris and evidence as possible to prevent identification of the remotely-guided planes.
Marion Fulk, former staff scientist from the Manhattan Project and Star Wars program, tutored Bollyn on the properties and dangers of depleted uranium at his home in Livermore, California. Fulk said he felt obliged to inform the public about the dangers of uranium to human health.Were DU Missiles used on the World Trade Center?
by Christopher Bollyn
23 October 2004
The video, "911: In Plane Site," by Dave von Kleist, examines the video evidence and shows that there was a white flash before United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 11 struck the towers.
In the case of the South Tower, the von Kleist video shows the underside of the plane, seen from from four different cameras and angles, with a cylindrical pod and a mysterious white object being fired from the pod before the plane hits the tower. This object impacts the tower before the plane, creating a bright flash.
The white flashes are similar to the flashes that are seen when depleted uranium (DU) penetrators hits their target. DU is a spontaneous pyrophoric material, i.e. it inflames when reaching its target generating such heat that it explodes. (More correctly stated, a pyrophoric substance is a reactive metal, like uranium, that will ignite spontaneously in air.)
If DU missiles preceded the impacts of Flights 175 and 11, then there is the question of what happened to the DU penetrators? One would expect that they traveled through the towers and carried on into the streets of New York or into other buildings.
Unless they impacted sufficiently dense objects to stop them, they should have continued through the buildings, and be seen flying ahead of the flames and debris. After all, uranium is 1.7 times more dense than lead.
A photo in Eric Hufschmid's book "Painful Questions" [p. 39, seen above] shows two objects passing through the South Tower, ahead of the flames. One of them displays the characterics of burning uranium [see above photos].
In the main photo, seen below, two objects are visible passing through the South Tower. One is black and leaving a white smoke trail; the other is burning with a bright white flame and leaving a black trail.
The color of the flame and the color of the oxides [smoke] are important. The color of the flame indicates the substance that is burning and its temperature. The bright white flame is indicative of a reactive metal, such as magnesium or uranium.
I contacted Marion Fulk, a former staff scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Lab, to ask about the photos seen below. After studying the photos, I asked Fulk if the object in the photo could be uranium.
"Yes," Fulk said, "It is possible." Asked if the black smoke could be uranium oxides, Fulk said, "Yes, it could be uranium oxide."
Fulk went on to describe the "dirty" olive green, brown, and black colors of the 21 different phases of uranium oxide.
The gap between the burning object and the black smoke trail was explained by Leuren Moret, geo-scientist and international radiation expert, who said that the gap is where the uranium gas and vapors are so hot they are still invisible. As the vapors cool, they condense into visible uranium oxides.
Asked how the piece of uranium could be burning so hot, Moret explained that some of the kinetic energy from the uranium missile would be converted into heat.
If this is a DU penetrator, it could explain Moret's claim that the World Trade Center rubble was radioactive.
Were DU missiles used to ignite the fuel in the airplanes to create the spectacular explosions that were used to explain the pre-planned demolition of the twin towers?
Video Evidence of DU on 9/11
Christopher Bollyn presented evidence that debunked the official version of events of 9/11 at a meeting in Los Angeles in October 2004. He showed this video about the possibility that uranium was used during the attack at the WTC and the Pentagon: www.erichufschmid.net/ForBollynsSpeech23Oct2004.wmv
The photo below from the Pentagon clean-up shows the extensive decontamination procedures that were followed after 9/11. Such procedures and precautions were not done at the World Trade Center. What were the people at the Pentagon so concerned about? Was the site hot from depleted uranium?
End Notes and Comments:
* "Based on analysis of radar data, the National Transportation and Safety Board reported the groundspeed just before impact as 510 knots. This is well beyond the maximum operating velocity of 360 knots, and maximum dive velocity of 410 knots. The possibilities as I see them are:
(1) this wasn’t a standard 767-200;
(2) the radar data was compromised in some manner;
(3) the NTSB analysis was erroneous; or
(4) the 767 flew well beyond its flight envelope, was controllable, and managed to hit a relatively small target."
- Dwain Deets, Retired NASA Senior Executive, “NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The ‘Elephant In The Room’”, June 22, 2010, PilotsFor911Truth.org
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/911_Aircraft_Speed_Deets.html
Important comment from Captain Russ Wittenberg, who knows all about the 767 that supposedly hit the South Tower - having flown the aircraft multiple times:
To my aviator and non-aviator friends, this is a very short, non technical, visual demonstration of aerodynamics at transonic to supersonic speeds. This is important to know, even if you are NOT an aviator. Why? Well, if you’re at all interested in the events that happened on 9/11/01 at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, this will begin to explain WHY the "official story" (actually, fairy tale) that almost everyone (who is NOT a pilot or has knowledge of high speed flight) has bought into, "hook, line, and sinker." "They" would have us believe that the airliners going well over 110 knots ABOVE their maximum design limit speed (called Vmo)! The fakers who made up the "fairy tale" of course weren't pilots, so, they didn't know what they were doing!
Here are the numbers: The fakers say the B-757's and 767's were doing about 530 MPH (that's statute miles per hour). Well, we don't use statute miles! We use KNOTS! So, this translates to about 460 Knots, which is exactly 110 knots ABOVE Vmo of 350 Kts at about 1000' above MSL (sea level)! IN LEVEL FLIGHT NO LESS!!!! THIS IS ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE! The "Drag Rise" (shock waves) would rip the wings off the airplane well before reaching that speed! Above Vy, (best rate of climb speed) drag increases to the square of the velocity of the air speed! Remember folks, these were AIRLINERS - NOT JET FIGHTERS like the ones you will see here!
* "Based on analysis of radar data, the National Transportation and Safety Board reported the groundspeed just before impact as 510 knots. This is well beyond the maximum operating velocity of 360 knots, and maximum dive velocity of 410 knots. The possibilities as I see them are:
(1) this wasn’t a standard 767-200;
(2) the radar data was compromised in some manner;
(3) the NTSB analysis was erroneous; or
(4) the 767 flew well beyond its flight envelope, was controllable, and managed to hit a relatively small target."
- Dwain Deets, Retired NASA Senior Executive, “NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The ‘Elephant In The Room’”, June 22, 2010, PilotsFor911Truth.org
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/911_Aircraft_Speed_Deets.html
Important comment from Captain Russ Wittenberg, who knows all about the 767 that supposedly hit the South Tower - having flown the aircraft multiple times:
To my aviator and non-aviator friends, this is a very short, non technical, visual demonstration of aerodynamics at transonic to supersonic speeds. This is important to know, even if you are NOT an aviator. Why? Well, if you’re at all interested in the events that happened on 9/11/01 at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, this will begin to explain WHY the "official story" (actually, fairy tale) that almost everyone (who is NOT a pilot or has knowledge of high speed flight) has bought into, "hook, line, and sinker." "They" would have us believe that the airliners going well over 110 knots ABOVE their maximum design limit speed (called Vmo)! The fakers who made up the "fairy tale" of course weren't pilots, so, they didn't know what they were doing!
Here are the numbers: The fakers say the B-757's and 767's were doing about 530 MPH (that's statute miles per hour). Well, we don't use statute miles! We use KNOTS! So, this translates to about 460 Knots, which is exactly 110 knots ABOVE Vmo of 350 Kts at about 1000' above MSL (sea level)! IN LEVEL FLIGHT NO LESS!!!! THIS IS ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE! The "Drag Rise" (shock waves) would rip the wings off the airplane well before reaching that speed! Above Vy, (best rate of climb speed) drag increases to the square of the velocity of the air speed! Remember folks, these were AIRLINERS - NOT JET FIGHTERS like the ones you will see here!
United Air Lines Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret.) was Pilot in Command (PIC) on each of the UAL aircraft that were supposedly used on the event on 9/11 - multiple times. He flew the actual B-767 that hit the South Tower (UA 175) and the B-757 that supposedly crashed at Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Sources and Recommended Reading:
Cooper, Glenda, "Trade Center Scrap Is Examined For Details on Causes of Collapse", The Washington Post, 6 October 2001http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html
9/11: World Trade Center Attack, Pilots for 9/11 TruthCooper, Glenda, "Trade Center Scrap Is Examined For Details on Causes of Collapse", The Washington Post, 6 October 2001http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=19732
"WTC Jet Engine Confirmed NOT From Boeing 767", by Jon Carlson, April 4, 2005
http://www.rense.com/general63/wtcc.htm
Bollyn, Christopher, "Understanding the Use of Thermite on 9/11", July 14, 2009
http://www.bollyn.com/understanding-the-use-of-thermite-on-9-11
Bollyn, Christopher, "9/11 Planes Flew Directly into Secure Computer Rooms in Both Towers," January 11, 2007
