Buncefield proves 911 is a lie

[karlos]

Link


Buncefield Oil depot fire
Fuel burnt for several days
911 a tiny amount of fuel burnt for a few minutes
Yet 911 steel melted in minutes.
Concrete turned to dust.


Second point
Have we been lied to about Buncefield?
Was it a missile?
Was it supposed to be claimed by 'Al Qaeda'?
how come the sprinklers and safety valves ALL failed?

[karlos]

Link

[Bongo]

I voted no, but it does highlight the fact that hydrocarbon fires do not melt steel.

Absolutely amazing tunes on both videos though...

[Fallious]

[TonyGosling]

Buncefield firm Motherwell Control Systems escapes £300k penalty
By Andrew Penman on July 29, 2010

The huge fines for some of the companies responsible for the Buncefield oil depot explosion in 2005 have overshadowed one company fined just £1,000.

The penalty slapped on Motherwell Control Systems 2003 Ltd is dwarfed by the £9.5million fines shared among other offenders, including oil giant Total.

Why was it so little? Because Motherwell had gone into voluntary ­liquidation, making a stiffer fine pointless.

Meanwhile directors Philip Green and Peter Hamil hived off a chunk of Motherwell's ­business to a newly created firm, Storage Tank Solutions.

Fellow director Mark Price took another chunk of the business to ­Motherwell Tank Gauging.

In taking on the old Motherwell business, both new outfits - which share the same phone number - had agreements excluding "any liabilities relating to the Buncefield Depot fire".

So is this just a sneaky way of avoiding its ­responsibilities?

No, insists Green, saying: "The company was left with no alternative but to go into liquidation as a result of its insurance being withdrawn."

Mr Justice Calvert-Smith put it differently, saying the company "escaped its just deserts" and if it was still in existence he would have slapped it with £300,000 legal costs.

http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigations/2010/07/buncefield-firm-mothe rwell-con.html