See other 9/11 Articles
Title: 9/11 demolition theory challenged
Source:
BBC
URL Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6987965.stm
Published: Sep 11, 2007
Author: staff
Post Date: 2010-07-17 17:31:29 by buckeroo
Ping List: *4um PSY-OP Club* Subscribe to *4um PSY-OP Club*
Keywords: None
Views: 17135
Comments: 1209
An analysis of the World Trade Center collapse has challenged a conspiracy theory surrounding the 9/11 attacks. The study by a Cambridge University engineer demonstrates that once the collapse of the twin towers began, it was destined to be rapid and total. One of many conspiracy theories proposes that the buildings came down in a manner consistent with a "controlled demolition". The study suggests a different explanation for how the towers fell. Over 2,800 people were killed in the devastating attacks on New York. After reviewing television footage of the Trade Center's destruction, engineers had proposed the idea of "progressive collapse" to explain the way the twin towers disintegrated on 11 September 2001. This mode of structural failure describes the way the building fell straight down rather than toppling, with each successive floor crushing the one beneath (an effect called "pancaking"). Resistance to collapse Dr Keith Seffen set out to test mathematically whether this chain reaction really could explain what happened in Lower Manhattan six years ago. The findings are to be published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics. Previous studies have tended to focus on the initial stages of collapse, showing that there was an initial, localised failure around the aircraft impact zones, and that this probably led to the progressive collapse of both structures. Man stands amid rubble of the World Trade Center, AFP/Getty Once the collapse began, it was destined to be "rapid and total" In other words, the damaged parts of the tower were bound to fall down, but it was not clear why the undamaged building should have offered little resistance to these falling parts. "The initiation part has been quantified by many people; but no one had put numbers on the progressive collapse," Dr Seffen told the BBC News website. Dr Seffen was able to calculate the "residual capacity" of the undamaged building: that is, simply speaking, the ability of the undamaged structure to resist or comply with collapse. His calculations suggest the residual capacity of the north and south towers was limited, and that once the collapse was set in motion, it would take only nine seconds for the building to go down. This is just a little longer than a free-falling coin, dropped from the top of either tower, would take to reach the ground. 'Fair assumption' The University of Cambridge engineer said his results therefore suggested progressive collapse was "a fair assumption in terms of how the building fell". "One thing that confounded engineers was how falling parts of the structure ploughed through undamaged building beneath and brought the towers down so quickly," said Dr Seffen. The south tower of the World Trade Center collapses, AP Conspiracy theorists see evidence of a "controlled detonation" He added that his calculations showed this was a "very ordinary thing to happen" and that no other intervention, such as explosive charges laid inside the building, was needed to explain the behaviour of the buildings. The controlled detonation idea, espoused on several internet websites, asserts that the manner of collapse is consistent with synchronised rows of explosives going off inside the World Trade Center. This would have generated a demolition wave that explained the speed, uniformity and similarity between the collapses of both towers. Conspiracy theorists assert that these explosive "squibs" can actually be seen going off in photos and video footage of the collapse. These appear as ejections of gas and debris from the sides of the building, well below the descending rubble. Other observers say this could be explained by debris falling down lift shafts and impacting on lower floors during the collapse. Dr Seffen's research could help inform future building design.
[Thread Locked] Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-961) not displayed.
.
.
.
#962. To: FormerLurker, buckeroo (#958)
(Edited)
You've already demonstrated that nothing matters to a k00kswiller except stale already debunked detritus that nobody outside of a Six Percenter minority will get anywhere near to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From the article... Contrary to the Washington Post’s assertion that this certificate allowed him "to fly commercial jets", in fact it only allowed him to begin passenger jet training. Hanjour did so, only to fail the class.36 As the Associated Press reported, the "certification allowed him to begin passenger jet training at an Arizona flight school despite having what instructors later described as limited flying skills and an even more limited command of English."37 Furthermore, there remains an open question about whether Hanjour was actually qualified to receive that certificate in the first place. According to Heather Awsumb, a spokeswoman for Professional Airways Systems Specialists (PASS), a union that represents FAA employees, "The real problem is that regular oversight is handed over to private industry", since private contractors "receive between $200 and $300 for each check flight. If they get a reputation for being tough, they won’t get any business."38 To obtain a commercial pilot license, the applicant must "Be able to read, speak, write, and understand the English language." It seems highly dubious that Hanjour met that qualification, as the 9/11 Commission itself acknowledges that his English skills were inadequate. The certificate does not allow its holder to fly any commercial aircraft, but is issued for "the aircraft category and class rating sought". Hanjour only trained in light propeller planes like the single-engine Cessna and twin-engine Piper, and had never flown a jet aircraft.39
More than 6% think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition. Matter of fact, I think you are in the minority here, retards still are last time I checked.
God is always good!
Good post, AG... it is fantastick to see FACTUAL data supported on this website. Not many talk about FLT93 ... so far. That insidious, diabolical hijacker bastard was a flt training instructor whom nose dived ... why? Because the fucker was beaten to death death by some of the most valiant people on the planet.
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
From the WTC demolition article; And as Sullivan watched the towers collapse that day, like so many did, he pondered at how fast it all took place, and how suddenly and symmetrically they were brought down. "I knew it was an explosive event as soon as I saw it, there was no question in my mind," said Sullivan. Most of us agree -- it's not by chance that the first tower just happened to collapse -- then the second in the same manner. What convinced him completely is when he watched Tower 7 fall that day, "I mean, come on, it was complete destruction. I've seen buildings fall like that for years -- that was the end game for me." Keep in mind that Sullivan did this for a living for several years -- it is like second nature for him to see this type of demolition. If anybody would know, it should be him. But we went ahead and asked him, “Is there any chance that normal office fires (the official cause of the ’collapse’) could have been responsible for the smooth, symmetrical, free-fall acceleration of building 7? “Not a chance,” he retorted. We just wanted to be sure. When we asked him if he followed any of the 9/11 Commission hearings or that of the NIST reporting, he had the same answer for both "I have no tolerance for people who lie to me about what I know to be true. I threw my hands up in disgust and never watched another hearing after the first. As for NIST, I didn't even watch because I knew what to expect." He did however follow the final report on the collapse of Tower 7 and said it angered him that they could actually convince so many of their fraudulent claims.
Your overall article comment is hacked, patch work quilt of pure, unadulterated BS. You even know it... the conclusions (without mathematics or physics) are unsupported allegations.
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
Liar. And you ARE a liar extraordinaire. From the Hanjour article; John Ashcroft told reporters early in the investigation, "It is our belief and the evidence indicates that flight training was received in the United States and that their capacity to operate the aircraft was substantial. It’s very clear that these orchestrated coordinated assaults on our country were well- conducted and conducted in a technically proficient way. It is not that easy to land these kinds of aircraft at very specific locations with accuracy or to direct them with the kind of accuracy, which was deadly in this case."7 A pilot with a major carrier for over 30 years told CNN that "the hijackers must have been extremely knowledgeable and capable aviators."8 An air traffic controller from Dulles International Airport told ABC News, "The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane. You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."9 CBS News suggested that according to its sources, Flight 77, "flying at more than 400 mph, was too fast and too high when it neared the Pentagon at 9:35. The hijacker-pilots were then forced to execute a difficult high-speed descending turn. Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes. The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it’s clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijackers had better flying skills than many investigators first believed. The jetliner disappeared from radar at 9:37 and less than a minute later it clipped the tops of street lights and plowed into the Pentagon at 460 mph."10 The Washington Post similarly noted that the plane "was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm." Hanjour was so skilled, in fact, that "just as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot" – later identified as Hanjour – "executed a pivot so tight it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver."11 The Post reported in another article that "After the attacks ... aviation experts concluded that the final maneuvers of American Airlines Flight 77 – a tight turn followed by a steep, accurate descent into the Pentagon – was the work of ‘a great talent ... virtually a textbook turn and landing.’"12 According to the report of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) cited by the 9/11 Commission, information from the flight data recorder recovered from the Pentagon crash site and radar data from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) show that the autopilot was disengaged "as the aircraft leveled near 7000 feet. Slight course changes were initiated, during which variations in altitude between 6800 and 8000 feet were noted. At 9:34 AM, the aircraft was positioned about 3.5 miles west-southwest of the Pentagon, and started a right 330-degree descending turn to the right. At the end of the turn, the aircraft was at about 2000 feet altitude and 4 miles southwest of the Pentagon. Over the next 30 seconds, power was increased to near maximum and the nose was pitched down in response to control column movements. The airplane accelerated to approximately 460 knots (530 miles per hour) at impact with the Pentagon. The time of impact was 9:37:45 AM."13 The NTSB created a computer simulation of the flight from the flight data recorder information showing that the plane was actually at more than 8,100 feet and doing about 330 mph when it began its banking turn at 9:34 am. 14 At that point, the alleged pilot Hanjour could have simply decreased thrust, nosed down, and guided the plane into what would have been 29 acres, or 1,263,240 square feet of target area – the equivalent of about 22 football fields.15 From this angle, proverbially speaking, it would have been like trying to hit the side of a barn. Hanjour could have guided the plane into the enormous roof of the building, including the side of the building where the office of the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, was located, and where he happened to be that morning.16 Instead, the plane began a steep banking descent, circling downward in a 330- degree turn while dropping more than 5,600 feet in three minutes before re- aligning with the Pentagon and increasing to maximum thrust towards the building. The nose was kept down despite the increased lift from the acceleration, while flying so close to the ground that it clipped lamp posts along the interstate highway before plowing into the building at more than 530 mph, precisely hitting a target only 71 feet high, or just 26.5 feet taller than the Boeing 757 itself.17 In other words, by performing this maneuver, Hanjour reduced his vertical target area from a size comparable to the height of the Empire State Building to an area just 5 stories high. Instead of descending at an angle and plowing through the roof and floors of the building to cause the greatest possible number of casualties, including possibly taking out the Secretary of Defense, Hanjour hit wedge 1 of the Pentagon, opposite to Rumsfeld’s office, which happened to be under construction, and where the plane, travelling horizontally, had to penetrate through the steel- and kevlar-reinforced outer wall of the building’s southwest E-ring in addition to the numerous additional walls of the inner rings of the building.18 But even more problematic than the question of why Hanjour would perform this maneuver is the question of how he performed it. Perhaps the most incredible thing about this, the official account of what happened to Flight 77, is that Hani Hanjour was in reality such a horrible pilot that he had trouble handling a light single-engine aircraft and even just one month before the attacks was rejected at two different schools because he was judged too incompetent to rent a plane and fly solo.
A 2006 Zogby poll actually put the number who believe "The USG did it" at 4.2%. I am being generous when I call you Six Percenters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sullivan pondered? Isn't that a quaint idea. What is Sullivan's background? Other than working as a laborer at some company?
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
Sure it is buckie, sure it is... He demolished buildings using explosives, and worked for Controlled Demolition Inc. You know, the same company your boyfriend likes to bring up as a source. Did you even read the article?
Oh and BTW, World Trade Center Building 7 DID collapse at free fall speed.
BFD... your article uses a few footnotes/references that are factual but don't lead to conclusions supporting the thesis. Hanjour was a licensed pilot! You lose, pal... your own quotes from [35]....
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
Instead, the plane began a steep banking descent, circling downward in a 330- degree turn while dropping more than 5,600 feet in three minutes before re- aligning with the Pentagon and increasing to maximum thrust towards the building. The nose was kept down despite the increased lift from the acceleration, while flying so close to the ground that it clipped lamp posts along the interstate highway before plowing into the building at ... Instead of descending at an angle and plowing through the roof and floors of the building to cause the greatest possible number of casualties, including possibly taking out the Secretary of Defense, Hanjour hit wedge 1 of the Pentagon, opposite to Rumsfeld’s office, which happened to be under construction, and where the plane, travelling horizontally, had to penetrate through the steel- and kevlar-reinforced outer wall of the building’s southwest E-ring in addition to the numerous additional walls of the inner rings of the building. What a fucking whack You want to allege that any attacker deliberately ignored a high value north side target, to put the plane into a turn where he clipped lamp standards and instead hit a mostly empty, mostly vacant, recently reinforced office backwater.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yep.
Where are the credentials of the folks that made that YouTube uplink? As far as I am concerned it is worthless data.
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
Like that should be a surprise.
What a fucking whack Ah, when totally proven wrong, resort to calling me a "fucking whack", how brilliant. You want to allege that any attacker deliberately ignored a high value north side target, to put the plane into a turn where he clipped lamp standards and instead hit a mostly empty, mostly vacant, recently reinforced office backwater. Well OF COURSE that is what would happen if the ATTACKER was NOT a "crazed raghead" who "hated us for our freedom", but rather some covert remote operator utilizing computer assisted flight control to take out an area that would do the LEAST damage.
Aren't those cool, neat facts from FL's own resource? WOW... "proverbial" has really swayed my thinking now. ROTFL
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
Aren't those cool, neat facts from FL's own resource? WOW... "proverbial" has really swayed my thinking now. ROTFL They're not facts. It's an analogy. "Like hitting the side of a barn." Which it was. Fuck you're stupid.
There are two and here they are @: Everyone who believes that those who trust the government and believe it's wacky conspiracy theories are the biggest KOOKS of all, here's your thread Post #49 Post #50 So don't try to make that baseless nonsense claim again, Non-Truthers, or be exposed and PWND as Willful Liars.
------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Watch the videos and find out...
Oh this is RICH! .. no facts just silly BS. Thanks for making my point, pal.
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
E pur si muove! (& the truth will out.) There is no long form.
Retard, everyone that sees WTC come down knows it was a controlled demolition if they have even a average IQ. You obviously don't, but it is nice that they let you play at the computer at your retard institution.
God is always good!
So why didn't your ***covert remote operator*** use the same tactic of hitting the "least damageable location" of NYC buildings, whackjob?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Oh sure, ALL the witnesses and people involved don't know as much as you bucko. The air traffic controllers at Dulles International Airport are no match for your expertise, and the various airline pilots stating the pilot who flew the plane into the Pentagon had to have been highly skilled are no match for your vast experience flying airliners, and the flight instructors who actually delt with him and who judged him to be totally incompentent just didn't know what they were talking about I guess. In fact, even the 9/11 Commissioners who determined his English skills to be inadequate were just being racists and picking on the poor guy, since his English skills MUST have been pretty good for him to get that license, right bucko?
It wasn't the Pentagon, Rumsfeld wasn't there, and they WANTED to bring those towers down.
Any FACTS called mathematics and physics or mechanical stress analysis? You should be ashamed of your own posts.
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Oh and there WAS a ***covert remote operator*** or two involved, at least in terms of setting off the remote triggered demolitions.
Rumsfeld wasn't in the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 in the early morning hours briefing with Wolfowitz? Link, please?
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
You argue like a girl. A dumb girl.
PROOF, please.
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
Actually, you had your panties pulled down agreeing with me, wud.
"we ought to lay off the criticism" -- Pinguinite, circa 2010-05-26 22:17:22 ET
You have no shame, because you have no idea how damn stupid you are.
God is always good!
You ignore any facts and evidence presented, whether it utilizes physics and math, or whether it's testimony from actual experts and witnesses. You cling to your religious belief that 19 "angry ragheads did 911", no matter HOW much proof and evidence there is which conflicts with that faith based belief. In fact, 7 or more of them are still alive, so guess what, it wasn't THOSE 7 or so that "did it".
9/11 Was An Inside Job.
Stop insulting the girls.....even the dumb gilrs!! Respect my authority!!! : ) Yippie.......Ab slips in for 1000!!!
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
1 Thousand. Edit: 1 Thousand and one.
Since building 7 could NOT have collapsed any other way than by controlled demolition, do you think some guy stood there with a Bic lighter inside the building and lit a fuse?
Comments (1003 - 1209) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestSo what
Doesn't matter,
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#963. To: buckeroo, AGaviator, ALL (#960)
Thank you FL! You are a human dyn-o-mo ... just a day late and a dollar short from original posting material by AG (whom has maintained all along that Hanjour was a pilot) ....
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#964. To: AGAviator (#962)
(Edited)
#965. To: AGAviator (#959)
The other 2 hijackings were tactical failures and only served to get America more pissed off
#966. To: AGAviator, buckeroo (#962)
You've already demonstrated that nothing matters to a k00kswiller except stale already debunked detritus that nobody outside of a Six Percenter minority will get anywhere near to.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#967. To: FormerLurker (#963)
From the article...
#968. To: AGAviator (#959)
(Edited)
Far from being a "precision maneuver" it was a wobbling and off- angle clipping of a wall instead of a full on 90 degree direct impact.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#969. To: RickyJ, buckeroo, turtle (#964)
(Edited)
More than 6% think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#970. To: FormerLurker (#966)
And as Sullivan watched the towers collapse that day, like so many did, he pondered at how fast it all took place, and how suddenly and symmetrically they were brought down.
#971. To: buckeroo (#967)
Your overall article comment is hacked, patch work quilt of pure, unadulterated BS. You even know it... the conclusions (without mathematics or physics) are unsupported allegations.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#972. To: buckeroo (#970)
What is Sullivan's background?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#973. To: buckeroo, AGaviator, ALL (#967)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#974. To: FormerLurker (#971)
#975. To: FormerLurker, blockqutoe (#968)
At that point, the alleged pilot Hanjour could have simply decreased thrust, nosed down, and guided the plane into what would have been 29 acres, or 1,263,240 square feet of target area – the equivalent of about 22 football fields.15 From this angle, proverbially speaking, it would have been like trying to hit the side of a barn. Hanjour could have guided the plane into the enormous roof of the building, including the side of the building where the office of the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, was located, and where he happened to be that morning.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#976. To: AGAviator (#954)
The details of how the demolitions were accomplished are largely irrelevant at this point in time, except that al Qaeda clearly lacked the access to accomplish any variant of them.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#977. To: FormerLurker (#973)
Oh and BTW, World Trade Center Building 7 DID collapse at free fall speed.
#978. To: FormerLurker (#973)
World Trade Center Building 7 DID collapse at free fall speed.
"So, now I am a liar, a lamebrain and a dimwit." -- buckeroo, circa 2010-07-16 20:04:00 ET
#979. To: AGAviator (#975)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#980. To: AGAviator, FormerLurker, All (#975)
proverbially speaking
#981. To: buckeroo, FormerLurker (#980)
proverbially speaking
"So, now I am a liar, a lamebrain and a dimwit." -- buckeroo, circa 2010-07-16 20:04:00 ET
#982. To: All (#941)
Me: I don't have time right now to locate my post on the ZioNIST report that clearly shows on its own pages (173-174, I think it is) how demolitions could easily have been planted at intervals and in several different ways during what might have appeared to be only routine building inspections. That's in addition to the Powerdown period and in addition to the many months of such access with Maintenance passes that the WTC Art Students-in-Residence had available to them to stage-prop and plant explosives in the buildings, so the arguments that it couldn't have been done covertly are baseless nonsense. Will try to find it and link it here as a reference as soon as I can get around to it.
http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=120440&Disp=0#C0
http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=120440&Disp=49#C49
http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=120440&Disp=50#C50
#983. To: buckeroo (#977)
Where are the credentials of the folks that made that YouTube uplink?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#984. To: wudidiz (#981)
They're not facts. It's an analogy.
#985. To: FormerLurker (#973)
#986. To: AGAviator (#969)
(Edited)
#987. To: FormerLurker, buckeroo (#979)
but rather some covert remote operator utilizing computer assisted
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#988. To: buckeroo (#974)
BFD... your article uses a few footnotes/references that are factual but don't lead to conclusions supporting the thesis.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#989. To: AGAviator (#987)
So why didn't your ***covert remote operator*** use the same tactic of hitting the "least damageable location" of NYC buildings, whackjob?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#990. To: RickyJ (#986)
Retard, everyone that sees WTC come down knows it was a controlled demolition if they have even a average IQ.
#991. To: RickyJ, buckeroo, turtle (#986)
(Edited)
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#992. To: AGAviator (#987)
So why didn't your ***covert remote operator*** use the same tactic of hitting the "least damageable location" of NYC buildings
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#993. To: FormerLurker (#989)
It wasn't the Pentagon, Rumsfeld wasn't there
#994. To: buckeroo (#984)
Oh this is RICH! .. no facts just silly BS. Thanks for making my point, pal.
"So, now I am a liar, a lamebrain and a dimwit." -- buckeroo, circa 2010-07-16 20:04:00 ET
#995. To: FormerLurker (#992)
Oh and there WAS a ***covert remote operator*** or two involved, at least in terms of setting off the remote triggered demolitions.
#996. To: wudidiz (#994)
#997. To: buckeroo (#990)
(Edited)
"TCP/IP crap for public networks"
#998. To: buckeroo (#990)
Any FACTS called mathematics and physics or mechanical stress analysis?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#999. To: FormerLurker (#998)
"So, now I am a liar, a lamebrain and a dimwit." -- buckeroo, circa 2010-07-16 20:04:00 ET
#1000. To: wudidiz (#994)
(Edited)
#1001. To: All, *9-11* (#999)
(Edited)
"So, now I am a liar, a lamebrain and a dimwit." -- buckeroo, circa 2010-07-16 20:04:00 ET
#1002. To: buckeroo (#995)
PROOF, please.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
.
.
.