Another 911 Smoking Gun: Melted Cars at the WTC Blocks from

User avatar
Posts: 259
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:40 pm
Location: Jersey City, NJ

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 4:19 am » by Kanaeta

Another 911 Smoking Gun:
Melted Cars at the WTC Blocks from the Towers


Posted by:
Mercury Lobar
Mar 15, 2008

What Melted Cop Cars 7
Blocks From WTC On 911?

The official story about 911 is that burning airplane fuel weakened the steel buildings at the World Trade Center, causing them to collapse. But if that is true, how can one explain the strange damage inflicted upon autos as far away as FDR drive (7 blocks from the WTC )?

Figure 64. Peculiar wilting of car doors and deformed window surrounds on FDR Drive

Figure Map. Areal view of lower Manhattan.


You must see these pictures, then you will see. All the pictures are here.

Tons More Melted Car Photos ... Beam5.html


From Ted Twietmeyer

I wish to clarify several issues with regard to my article on my possible explanation for the "toasted" WTC vehicles:

1. I welcome commentary from those who lived or worked within the blast/damage zone and have something to substantiate their claim. It is very important to discover and see evidence of melted metal in buildings between the WTC and damaged vehicle locations.

2. Destroyed computers, radios and televisions electronics from an EMP pulse are important evidence to support the theory. This was only briefly mentioned in the article. It is not currently known whether an EMP was present in conjunction with a magnetic pulse.

If you have a destroyed piece of equipment from that day you can contact me about where to ship it. I'll analyze it and give you a report on exactly what failed.

3. Seismological recordings are already on record showing another explosion occurred when at least one plane hit. This information was publicized years ago, and was probably the weapon that insured the building(s) would come down. If two such weapons detonated at exactly the same time, it may appear as one event on a seismological recording unless an interferometer method was employed using 2 or more recordings at distant locations.

4. There is an email spammer out on the web using data4science. net website to generate bulk spam emails (big surprise.) These emails do NOT originate at my webserver, and I'm receiving them as well. Our email server for the website does NOT have public bulk email software. Our webmaster wrote his own secure emailing program for the server that only sends out occasional newsletters to volunteers only. The program cannot be remotely activated. Kiddy-hackers easily mis-configure any number of bulk email programs and popular email programs such as Outlook Express, Eudora, etc.. to put any person's name (or website) as the sender.

5. The article is not meant to be the only possible explanation. The title cautiously states that it is only a POSSIBLE explanation. It is mainly intended to get people thinking about other events of that day. And based on the positive response I've received from many readers, it has accomplished that.

6. Using the images from another website may or may not have been a mistake. Some readers are certain that the two rows of vehicles in the parking lot shown were moved there. However, there isn't any photographic evidence to support this. Undisturbed dust UNDER the vehicles shows these vehicles were there all along since the collapse. For those who are sure they were moved, consider these facts: And if the vehicles were moved, would any tow truck driver go to the trouble to "sort" the vehicles in a such a way to move them to the parking lot shown, orienting them all the same way and grouping them according to damage? When there were hundreds of destroyed vehicles to be moved? Tow-truck and flat bed drivers are paid by the vehicle, and the more vehicles they move the more money they make. A totaled vehicle is still a total loss and not worth sorting.

7. My apologies for the typo about the definition of a Giga-watt that passed by me. 1 Giga-watt = 1,000 million watts.

8. Please do not waste my time or yours writing me hate-spam emails. These will no longer be read or responded to and will be auto-deleted. People who love mainstream network news and believe every word they hear are usually the writers of such trash.

I still welcome your constructive thoughts.

Ted Twietmeyer
www. data4science. net?

Image disciple & reppin X-TINCTION AGENDA <(-_-)> Till All Are One!

ID: bec86372862c

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 4:26 am » by jetxvii

9/11 was really truely an inside job... that day was Murderous and only animals could have done what they did... the only question I have is where the people are. I am sure they are dead but what exactly happened to them is really what I think everyone wants to know....

ID: e4a6b540f970

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 4:33 am » by brillbilly

[youtube]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/youtube] .hi this could be a reason for the cars melting or this is another different possibility, [youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube] im not saying this is what happened, we will probley never know the real reason as to what caused the distruction of the two towers and building 7 and EMP is another possibility :cheers:

Posts: 2546
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:59 am

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 4:48 am » by Realorfake

My guess would be the burning towers acted like a pyroclastic flow. since there was SOOO much material on fire before the buildings collapsed it wouldnt surprise me if super heated material was flung far from the twin towers when they collapsed.

I still belive 9/11 was an inside job but this could explain a lot of the unusual burns. We're just not used to classifying this phenomenon because buildings dont normally collapse when theyve caught fire. The twin towers were massive structures which had a HUGE incendiary start (two jets) which ignited enormous fires within the buildings.

A volcano's pyroclastic flow usually will show similar results......
How many times must you honk your horn and say fuck you?
Now what the fuck does that do?
You feel better now, I didnt let you pass.
How bout I stop my car and beat your fuckin' ass?

Posts: 2004
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 3:30 am

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 6:35 am » by Darrylmckay

realorfake wrote:HUGE incendiary start (two jets) which ignited enormous fires within the buildings

yes but thats not entirely true is it.

The release ( finally) of the tapes from the fire fighters that made it to the floors where the jets hit puts paid to the "enourmous fires" theory.

They can be heard saying they could have put the fires out with just a couple of crews and lines.
Most of the jet fuel exploded and vaporized when the jets struck.
There werent enormous fires inside the buildings.

As another example of thier strange conclusions, if it was the rageing fires from the jet feul that bought down the towers, how come the pentagon didnt burn to the ground.
Supposedly it was the same type of plane, same amount of fuel, small fire.
I will respect your beliefs*, I will research your beliefs, but dont expect me to believe.
* disclaimer-user makes no commitment to live up to this claim

Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:31 pm

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 6:58 am » by Anonymous1985

so if these 'mininukes' brought down the towers wouldnt the radiation be detectable still to this day at least a abnormally high count of rad's as compared to other surrounding's. :headscratch:

User avatar
Posts: 2661
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 8:09 am

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 7:16 am » by Hesop

I'm going to cry foul on this one.
Both vehicles in the op have been moved.
Both have received structural damage, most likely from falling debris. Since the debris is missing, they have obviously been moved.
Painting vehicles and bodywork has been both a hobby, and a profession of mine in lack of other work, since I was 16.
While both vehicles pictured, did receive fire damage, the structural damage pictured is not due to the amounts of excessive heats claimed. It's most likely from building debris falling on top of them. That should be very clear, especially in the squad car photo. On the firetruck it is obvious as well. The damaged squashed area? Take a look. The paint is still on the doors! Heat intense enough to cause the structural melting of either vehicle, would have removed all of the paint on them as well.

Posts: 303
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 4:43 pm

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 7:54 am » by Snutz

It's really simple actually. No star wars weapons ... no nukes, no emp, nothing of that sort. The damage you're seeing there is all from dust containing thermite .... yep, thermite ... the very dust that was tested to prove that it was used in the destruction of the towers. If it's strong enough to evaporate steel, I'd imagine it would have some sort of corrosive property as well to strip paint from steel.

ID: bec86372862c

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 7:56 am » by jetxvii

I agree with Hesop. if you look at the photos you can see they have been moved. and the vehicles look more crushed than melted. maybe some thermite/thermate did get on some of the cars. but these appear to be crushed and possibly a little heated..

ID: bec86372862c

PostMon Aug 17, 2009 8:00 am » by jetxvii

and also a big chunk of the building could have struck these cars setting them up for explosion from loose wiring and gasoline which would also burn the paints and contort the thin metal lining for the frame of the vehicle.


  • Related topics
    Last post