Title: 9/11 UAL 175 Plane on Radar AFTER It Has 'Crashed' Into The WTC; (MSNBC) Source:
, URL Source:http://, Published:Mar 16, 2009 Author:msnbc Post Date:2009-03-16 13:04:41 by Artisan Ping List:*9-11*Subscribe to *9-11* Keywords:None Views:11812 Comments:607
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. "I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
I don't know how that 47; got in the title, it should say WTC.
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. "I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
Oh, they'll be out in force. It might take them a day or two, but for every new revelation shining light on the 911 Inside Job they have a spin very quickly. Either they will attack the film as altered or they'll have some other spin such as the Radar was incompetent.
They won't hold water but for the Sheeple who don't want to look at reality they will grasp at any spin straw to avoid looking. They want the "Nightly Nooze" to tell them what they think.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
if the identifying radar system is in real time as he claimed then it is pretty damning evidence of remote controlled drone planes. I don't know antyhing about such systems which is why i pinged the pilots. Anyway, we all know the truth but to what end ? There is more than enough evidence but most politicians, clergy, academics and influence peddlers won't look at or acknowledge any of this. And time has gone on and it's almost 10 8 yrs past.
Anyway, it's fun to expose their lies. people do know, in general, but what comes of it? we shall watch.
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. "I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
What it accomplishes is forcing them to utilize resources to keep the lid on. Resources that then cannot be used to further their programs of subjugation. The lamestream media has lost mega-credibility because of 911, Waco, and OKC. Thus they have lost some control via media. That is why they needed an Oh'bummer at this time - because people are waking up. They just have not yet woken up to the reality that their lives and that of those they love hang in the balance. That reality is just not real to them. They do not want to look - the enormity of the programs and the extent of the evil requires a strong mind to look at. Some of the details are so vile and so repugnant to the sane mind that it is literally stomach turning. It scares them too much, but refusing to look assures that they will be murdered and the survivors, if any, enslaved. Continuing to push the truth exposes the lies and forces people to look at reality. Of course many people still will not look but the more it is out there the more it is pushed the more people it forces off of their fence trying to deny reality.
Just like the users of SSRI's do not want to look at the mountain of evidence as to just how bad they are. As well the dumbed down "I beeeeeeeeeelieve" the goobermunt do not want to believe the government could be so foul as to push these drugs with all of these foul side affects. They are so mind controlled by the media and the TV PROGRAMMING they watch that they cannot reconcile the conflict in their "mind".
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
#9. To: Itistoolate, war, Lacumo, Rotara, Cynicom, TwentyTwelve, christine, all (#8)
At this point "war" and "Lacumo" are pretty much ID'ed as government shills. So, of course "war" will support the Official Party Lyin'.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
The government's shit is mosty likely the closest to what happened. If anything got covered up it's how little attention the Boosh's were paying when it went down...
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
Sorry, not walking into you pathetic attempt at setting up a trap and diversion.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
A good bet - that shill works for the pervert bass turd Traitor morris. SPLC
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
Example: 'You believe what you read in the Spotlight? The Publisher, Willis DeCarto, is a well-known right-wing racist. I guess we know your politics -- does your Bible have a swastika on it? That certainly explains why you support this wild-eyed, right-wing conspiracy theory.'
Proper response: 'You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics. Your imply guilt by association and attack truth on the basis of the messenger. The Spotlight is well known Populist media source responsible for releasing facts and stories well before mainstream media will discuss the issues through their veil of silence. Willis DeCarto has successfully handled lawsuits regarding slanderous statements such as yours. Your undemonstrated charges against the messenger have nothing to do with the facts or the issues, and fly in the face of reason. Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics (rule 5 - sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule)?'
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
Your prediction was akin to predicting that if you pulled your pants down and tried to blow yourself in Times Square people would look.
Actually my prediction was more along the order of "if I step out into a rain shower that I would get wet.
Play Again?
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
One of the "facts" that you kooks try to morph into misinformation is the one on which FDNY pulled its personnel from 7. Youl idiots claim it means that they blew up the building...
"It is like a trance. So what can break a trance? The only thing that can break the trance is the light of truth." ~ Canadian Philosopher John McMurtry as he comments on the psychological warfare that has afflicted us all
"It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A: Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities. 1. He traveled with a U.S. passport, 2) He traveled with a British passport, or 3) He traveled with an Indonesian passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981. (Oh My God!!! Quick come up with a smarmy reply for this! It's too damaging to let stand without some immediate name calling and hysterics!)
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport. If he was traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he was traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008. Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
Is he a “natural born” citizen, or isn’t he? It seems pretty clear from the available evidence that he is not. If that proves to be the case he should minimize the damage to the country and follow the Nixon example; he should simply resign from office so that we can begin to clean up the mess he leaves behind."
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.
WRONG!!!
That corrected...big fucking deal...Pakistan did not forbid US citizens to travel to it. Up until a few years ago, you could fly to Canada and then to Havana and be admitted ON A US PASSPORT...
Thge propblem with you people is that you're stupid. You don't think things through with any objective sense and so it makes it easy for people to lie to you.
#31. To: war, HOUNDDAWG, PSUSA, Original_Intent (#27)
Thge propblem with you people is that you're stupid. You don't think things through with any objective sense and so it makes it easy for people to lie to you.
Oh, the irony.
Btw, you spelt stoopid wrong.
"It is like a trance. So what can break a trance? The only thing that can break the trance is the light of truth." ~ Canadian Philosopher John McMurtry as he comments on the psychological warfare that has afflicted us all
"Linda Starr Posts New Information Jump to Comments
Posted Jan 19 from Obamacrimes:
how many of you picked up on what Phil said on tonight’s radio show about the FOIA confirming Barry never had an American passport under the name of Barack Obama until his diplomatic passport issued as a US Senator? Do you understand and comprehend the enormity of that announcement? Do you all realize what it means? I can tell you now that is one part of several pieces of good news we had the other day that I hinted at and could not reveal. That information confirms Barry had to renew an Indonesian passport to go to Pakistan in 81. That means Barry swore an Oath of Allegiance to Indonesia and had to renounce all other allegiances to get that passport. This is independent confirmation of information we’ve had and from OUR OWN State Department, Barry couldn’t go to Pakistan on an American passport if he didn’t have one.
There are so many amazing pieces of good news coming in. I wish I could tell you all about it. I will say this, I am skeptical of the announcement Barry will be served with papers to block his swearing in tomorrow, but it’s not inconceivable in light of other information I have heard today. Again, I have no way to verify anything except that which we have obtained certified documents.
Despite the media's worst efforts to suppress this, if Barry wants to be reelected he'll have to produce something.
Of course all of his diehard blow jobbers will disappear by then the way those who used to support Nixon (and Clinton and Bush) now have....
they still cannot accept that no plane hit the WTC
This is absurd. Of course two planes hit the WTC towers. They weren't the planes we were told they were, but two planes hit them. Anyone saying no planes hit the WTC towers is putting out disinfo to discredit the 9/11 truth movement.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
Your (link) as to how 9/11 was done is the best overview I've seen so far. I theorized alternative 2 but the first one is probably more realistic considering that criminals like to keep things simple.
Given the seriousness of the Mega security breach, the abrupt shutdown of the mole hunt naturally prompted some wild speculation about the circumstances under which the search for Mega was abandoned. In March 1999, British author Gordon Thomas released a book, Gideon's Spies, which alleged that Israel had blackmailed the Clinton Administration, with the threat to release tapped telephone conversations between the President and Monica Lewinsky, to force Washington to abandon the Mega hunt. Indeed, in her testimony before independent counsel Kenneth Starr, Lewinsky had reported that the President had warned her, on March 29, 1997, at the height of the Mega hunt, that he suspected the White House telephones were being tapped by agents of an unnamed foreign country.
An "unnamed foreign country"?
Them dam Eskimos and Micronesians-you just can't trust em!
they still cannot accept that no plane hit the WTC
This is absurd. Of course two planes hit the WTC towers. They weren't the planes we were told they were, but two planes hit them. Anyone saying no planes hit the WTC towers is putting out disinfo to discredit the 9/11 truth movement.
I agree.
The real flight may have been remotely piloted out over the water and dumped in an ocean trench, and that would explain why it was spotted on Radar after it reportedly crashed.
Now that demons are in control no act of cold blooded murder is unthinkable.
The Information and Privacy Coordinator is responsible for acting on all initial requests except for requests for records coming under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Consular Affairs, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the Bureau of Human Resources, the Office of Medical Services, and the Office of the Inspector General.
(a) Third party requests. Except for requests under the Privacy Act by a parent of a minor or by a legal guardian (Sec. 171.32(c)), requests for records pertaining to another individual shall be processed under the FOIA and must be accompanied by a written authorization for access by the individual, notarized or made under penalty of perjury, or by proof that the individual is deceased (e.g., death certificate or obituary).
They weren't the planes we were told they were, but two planes hit them.
The second plane was clearly visible to me as I stood at th cporner of Church and Libertu as a United 767...it's an image that I will never lose until I turn cold and am burned and scattered...
Why are you even here on this forum war? Did Goldi give you a timeout for not praising the brave Israeli soldiers as they murdered little kids as much as she liked?
Or are you here just to troll for lack of anything better to do?
"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
Regardless, how do you explain the impossible freefall speed of the towers? The undamaged structure below the impact area would not have behaved like thin air, yet the structures (both towers, AND the relatively undamaged WTC7) fell at free fall speeds as if falling through thin air. What's your scientific explanation (and please don't say "pancaking" as even THAT would not occur at free fall speed).
Do you not find the fact that all records and evidence pertaining to the Enron investigation was destroyed in the relatively undamaged WTC7 to be just a tad suspicious?
What proof is there that the individuals cited as the 9/11 hijackers actually carried out the attacks, especially when some of them are still alive and have been on TV?
"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
I'd rather post on a forum in which there are basically no rules and thus nothing is enforced rather than one that claims to have them and then are selectively enforced. It's really nothing against Goldi. It's her forum and she can exercise or not exercise her editorial discsretion in any manner that she sees fit. I just happen to disagree with it. I like Goldi.
And, I still post at LP, btw...just not as much...
But as to WHY I am here...I was invited 3 and a half years ago to check this site out. I registered and lurked.
Explain this. See how the top of the tower is tilting on an angle? Simple physics would determine that the top of the tower should have toppled over and tumbled, as there is less resistance to the air than there would be to the steel and concrete below it, thus it would have continued it's rotational movement and toppled over.
Why did it all of a sudden drop like a rock straight down through the steel and concrete rather than simply topple over as it appears ready to do in the following picture?
"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
Regardless, how do you explain the impossible freefall speed of the towers?
They did not fall at free fall speed. The towers fell because the weigth bearing walls were actually the outside of the building. Once they were compromised as well as the support trusses it becamse an exercise in simple physics.
Do you not find the fact that all records and evidence pertaining to the Enron investigation was destroyed in the relatively undamaged WTC7 to be just a tad suspicious?
WTC 7 was no "realtively undamaged". Almost teh whole of the South Facade was gone and fires raged within it...
What proof is there that the individuals cited as the 9/11 hijackers actually carried out the attacks, especially when some of them are still alive and have been on TV?
Wha...chuckle...huh?
I'll buy the fact that some of the 9/11 hijackers most likely used aliases...BFD...
As you can see it's not dropping stright...your own photo shows the tilt...in the case of 1 it fell into the Deutsche Bank Building and in the case of 2 it fell into 7...
Oh looky here, we have a live shill onboard. I remember you from past 9/11 "discussions". Aren't you McCainRocks over at LP, and used to be HappyFunBalls, amongst a whole bunch of other names?
"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
The top of the tower should have continued it's fall to where it would have flipped to the side and fallen down without going through the rest of the entire tower. Sort of like putting a can on top of a damaged box of cereral and pushing down on one end of the can till it tilts if you want an analogy. The can wouldn't fall through the box, it'd simply slide off the box and fall.
"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
The top of the tower should have continued it's fall to where it would have flipped to the side and fallen down without going through the rest of the entire tower.
Uh no...it would not "flip"...gravity would take it in the most direct route of its momentum...
How could you have posted at LP and not know the difference between war and BAC? They both posted a lot and about the only agreement they had was that you truthers are about two pancakes short of a stack.
They fell in about 10-11 seconds, where free fall through air would have been a little over 9 seconds. So you're wrong.
The towers fell because the weigth bearing walls were actually the outside of the building.
For one, the steel core bore the majority of the weight. For two, the structure supported itself without falling for quite some time. The weight that the structure supported didn't change due to the fires, nor did it change PERIOD.
As far as energy exerted due to the collapse of one floor from the height that the planes impacted, there would be minimal extra load the structure would to have needed to support. So that's bullshit.
Once they were compromised as well as the support trusses it becamse an exercise in simple physics.
Apparently we studied a different sort of physics.
Uh...considering that they were not I don't find it suspicious at all.
Where were the Enron SEC filings stored?
WTC 7 was no "realtively undamaged". Almost teh whole of the South Facade was gone and fires raged within it...
Bullshit. Even if true, WTC7 was internally reinforced. Do you think it was incapable of supporting itself without one of it's exterior walls? How do you think it kept from falling while they were building it?
You have so many childish assumptions it's sort of humorous, as you have to used really fractured logic to arrive at your conclusions.
Oh and BTW, there were no "raging fires", there was a bit of a diesel fire inside but nothing close to a "raging fire".
You think that a structure such as WTC7 would simply collapse like a deck of cards due to a relatively small internal fire a bit of damage to an exterior wall?
Geesh.
I'll buy the fact that some of the 9/11 hijackers most likely used aliases...BFD...
The individuals listed as the hijackers are not said to be using aliases, and are indentified with not only their names but their photos. There are at least several individuals identified as hijackers who are still alive, and ARE the people that are so identified.
"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
Why did it all of a sudden drop like a rock straight down through the steel and concrete rather than simply topple over as it appears ready to do in the following picture?
You mean like what happens in a controlled demolition? Well, this is different....the plane hit the building (which was specifically designed to withstand the impact of a direct hit by a plane), and the plane had fuel (no matter that the fire was limited to just a couple floors, as opposed to other towers which have also had intense fire but never collapsed)....and because of the intense flames (limited to two floors?)....the structural beams just melted.......and can't you just believe these people already?!
How could you have posted at LP and not know the difference between war and BAC?
Because war shills for the government when it comes to 9/11 and behaves just like BAC on that topic, especially with his use of the word KOOK.
I'm just waiting for a ROFL to go along with it...
"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
It's sort of like Dorothy when she clicks her heels...
I bet that's what a lot of folks do, just click their heels and convince themselves that it's all just a bad dream. It's MUCH easier to simply believe the talking heads on TV than to actually think for themselves.
"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
Uh no...it would not "flip"...gravity would take it in the most direct route of its momentum...
Which is through the path of least resistance, ie. the air.
"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
You forgot that it was Magickal Jet Fuel™ that can change properties at will and burn hotter than the sun. And they only ever made one batch of it and it was all used that day as evidenced by the fact that other skyscrapers have burned longer and fully engulfed since then, yet none of them fell. Not one. And some had burned before that day too and not one of those fell either. Steel skyscrapers just can't handle that Magickal Jet Fuel™.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
Do you still dwell on the merits of The Brady Bunch vs Happy Days?
Do you still beat little puppies?
"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
It's MUCH easier to simply believe the talking heads on TV than to actually think for themselves.
So true! What I find also so insane...these very people (the media and .gov) they are believing are the very ones they admit have an agenda, do not care about the people, are only in politics for the power and money, are only on the airwaves to spout propaganda...but when it comes to 9/11, these same people (the media and .gov) become virtual truthtellers and outright angels if not saints.
You forgot that it was Magickal Jet Fuel™ that can change properties at will and burn hotter than the sun. And they only ever made one batch of it and it was all used that day as evidenced by the fact that other skyscrapers have burned longer and fully engulfed since then, yet none of them fell. Not one. And some had burned before that day too and not one of those fell either. Steel skyscrapers just can't handle that Magickal Jet Fuel™.
LOL...yes, you're absolutely right! Thanks for the reminder. : )
Hey war I have a question. What are your thoughts on Ron Brown?
"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
LOL...yes, you're absolutely right! Thanks for the reminder. : )
You're welcome. We have to remind folks of that because sometimes they forget. And some of them are easily duped and conned by the government and you can try to help them but you might as well talk to a fence post. You will come just as near getting through to it.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
Which is through the path of least resistance, ie. the air.
Uh...no...direct route to earth, Flippy, i.e. straight down once the relatiove motion of the center of gravity becomes perpendicular to the source of the gravity, i.e. the point where the center of gravity stops moving in any direction other than downward.
some of them are easily duped and conned by the government and you can try to help them but you might as well talk to a fence post. You will come just as near getting through to it.
What I find also so insane...these very people (the media and .gov) they are believing are the very ones they admit have an agenda, do not care about the people, are only in politics for the power and money, are only on the airwaves to spout propaganda...but when it comes to 9/11, these same people (the media and .gov) become virtual truthtellers and outright angels if not saints.
Exactly. There is obviously a huge disconnect happening here, where a person acts contrary to their own words and beliefs...
"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
"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
Uh, wrong. There was a small matter of concrete and steel between the top of the tower and their earth, where there was NO resistance to the air and the tower was already leaning in a direction where it should have slid off the structure. Since there would have been horizontal friction, the tower should have not slid but continued to fall over as is apparent it started to do.
Where'd you learn physics, the gym?
"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
So war, you neglected to tell me how the towers (ALL of them) collapsed at free fall speeds (or took a second or two more than if falling through air).
How do you explain the destruction of 100 or so floors of undamaged steel and concrete in a second or two?
"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
Ron Brown was about the only topic BAC was honest about. Thought I'd see what war would say if I asked.
"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
Yes. That's mightily impressive, a fire like that which can bring down a building onto its own feet.
A) The fire did not act alone.
B) It did not fall into it's own feet. 1 fell into the DB Building* and 2 fell into the south facade of 7.
I worked at 1 Liberty Plaza on 9/11 and did diasster recovery work that necessitated me going into the building a week or so later. You could clearly see that the towers fell over as well as down. Windows in about 20 floors of the western facade of 1 Liberty were gone...
Piece of WTC 1 in DB building...
YO can see parts of 2 on 7's footprint as well as the damage to 1 Liberty.
I believe BAC's theory was that if he couldn't dazzle you with his brilliance he would baffle you with bs. His novel-length posts turned most people off of anything he had to say.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
That would be NO...none of the doctors who examined him belived that he was murdered
Apparently you're either unaware or lying about the fact that the doctors who performed the autopsy found .45 caliber bullet holes in his head, and were quickly transfered to parts unknown and the autopsy x-rays were just as quickly "lost".
"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
Since there would have been horizontal friction, the tower should have not slid but continued to fall over as is apparent it started to do.
The top of the tower did topple over as you've been shown...the rest of the tower collapsed downward due to the total compromise of the outside bearing walls and inside supports...
YO can see parts of 2 on 7's footprint as well as the damage to 1 Liberty.
It fell straight down war, you can't deny that fact. So yes, it fell into it's own footprint, but sure there will be debris in the immediate area. What did you expect it to do, drill a whole for itself into the ground and fall into it?
"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
The top of the tower did topple over as you've been shown...
Wrong. Split seconds after that photo I posted was taken, the top of the tower fell straight DOWNWARDS and disintegrated into dust. That'd only be possible if there were DEMOLITIONS happening immediately below it AND WITHIN it.
"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
By Christopher Ruddy FOR THE TRIBUNE-REVIEW December 3, 1997
A circular hole in the skull of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown could have been a gunshot wound and certainly should have prompted an autopsy, according to an Air Force lieutenant colonel and forensic pathologist who investigated the jet crash in which Brown died.
"Even if you safely assumed accidental plane crash, when you got something that appears to be a homicide, that should bring everything to a screeching halt," Lt. Col. Steve Cogswell, a doctor and deputy medical examiner with the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, told the Tribune-Review.
In several interviews, Cogswell repeatedly referred to the wound as "an apparent gunshot wound." However, he also said, "Whether it's a bullet or something else, we don't know."
On April 3, 1996, an Air Force jet carrying Brown and 34 others, including 14 business executives on a trade mission to Croatia, crashed into a mountainside. The Air Force, in a 22-volume report issued in June of 1996, confirmed its initial judgment that the crash resulted from pilot errors and faulty navigation equipment.
Cogswell, who has approximately 12 years' experience as a forensic pathologist, contends evidence that Ron Brown might have been murdered was ignored. He said the main evidence of possible homicide was a hole found on the vertex, the very top of the skull. "Essentially ... Brown had a .45-inch inwardly beveling circular hole in the top of his head, which is essentially the description of a .45-caliber gunshot wound," Cogswell added....
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
Despite all the photo evidence that I just provided you to the contrary?
Did the conspirators come in with a huge crain when noone was looking and put that piece of WTC 1 into the DB Building and take that huge assed scoop out of it as well?
#103. To: war, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, all (#60)
They did not fall at free fall speed. The towers fell because the weigth bearing walls were actually the outside of the building. Once they were compromised as well as the support trusses it becamse an exercise in simple physics.
The primary load bearing structure of the WTC Towers were the central support columns (37 of them) composed of 4 FOOT THICK Structural Steel. The floors were hung off of this massive reinforced central column. The perimeter structure existed only as wind break, stabilization, to hold up the outside edge of the floors, and the outside walls. THEY WERE NOT the primary support of the buildings. Failure of the outside structure would not have caused the floors to "pancake" as they were the secondary NOT PRIMARY support of the structures. To say that they were is simply a disinformation line which has been repeated ad nauseam and is accepted ONLY by those naive enough, or well paid enough, to accept the Official Fairy Tale.
I'll buy the fact that some of the 9/11 hijackers most likely used aliases...BFD...
And of course you refuse to follow that to the logical conclusion. We do not really know WHO the "hijackers" were, nor even if there were as represented in the Official Fairy Tale.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
Wrong. Split seconds after that photo I posted was taken, the top of the tower fell straight DOWNWARDS
IT'S CALLED GRAVITY MORON. The top of the tower fell from a STANDING STATE. Once the center of gravity squared to the force of gravity it had no choice but to fall straight down. That does not mean that it suddenly uprighted itself.
Geezus you are so fucking stupid it aches.
Quick: Protest that I engage in name calling while you call me a Government promoting shill of Moussad...
October 25, 2001, the remains of the fuselage from UAL 175 on the roof of WTC 5:
Where are the passengers and flight crew? DEAD and smashed to smithereens. I just can't buy into the missing plane/passenger conspiracies.
_________________________________________________________________________ "This man is Jesus,” shouted one man, spilling his Guinness as Barack Obama began his inaugural address. “When will he come to Kenya to save us?”
“The best and first guarantor of our neutrality and our independent existence is the defensive will of the people…and the proverbial marksmanship of the Swiss shooter. Each soldier a good marksman! Each shot a hit!” -Schweizerische Schuetzenzeitung (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
THEY WERE NOT the primary support of the buildings
WRONG.
A tube of a tower
That 75 percent was also made possible by another innovation. Previous high- rises had relied for their structural integrity on a forest of supporting columns on each floor. Typically, architects spaced these 30 feet apart throughout the interior. The exterior walls of such buildings were merely curtain walls, which let light in and kept weather out but provided little support.
Such was not the case in the World Trade Center. Consulting engineers Leslie Robertson and John Skilling invented an entirely new method of construction. The forest of interior columns vanished; such columns only appeared in and around the central core of elevator shafts, stairwells, and bathrooms. Then it was nothing but open space—60 feet of it on two sides, 35 on the other two sides—before one reached the outside walls. These were not curtain walls but cages of steel columns spaced just over a yard apart, with 22 inches of glass in between. (Minoru Yamasaki, the building's architect, designed it this way in part because he was insecure with heights and felt more comfortable with such narrow windows.)
The shafts of steel in the exterior walls shouldered not only gravity loads pressing down from above but also lateral loads caused by gusty winds nudging the building from the side. Such tube-style architecture relied on high- strength steel, which was only then becoming available. It resulted in up to an acre of rentable space on each floor, and it became the pioneering style of frame for a whole new generation of buildings.
When I came out of 1 Liberty on the Cortland St side after 2 was hit by the first jet, there was debris that obviously came from a passenger jet on the street just outside the building. There was a seat cover...some skin of the jet similar to the above but not singed...there was also some of the inside skin of the jet...
You are trying to persuade someone whose mind, such as it is, is content with the government fairy tale. Why waste your time on him?
Only because I refuse to let the lies go unanswered.
Of course we can expect doublespeak and evasion in return, but then that is what shills are paid to do.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
IT'S CALLED GRAVITY MORON. The top of the tower fell from a STANDING STATE. Once the center of gravity squared to the force of gravity it had no choice but to fall straight down.
So Mr. Wizard, tell me, why don't you fall through the floor you're standing on and keep going to the center of the earth? That damn gravity pushes you down, so you SHOULD just fall, right?
You fucking idiot, the fact is, there is something BLOCKING your path to the center of the earth, just as there was something blocking the fall of the top of the WTC, specifically, the 100 floors below it.
"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
You are a master of projection, I'll give you that much at least.
"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
Once the center of gravity squared to the force of gravity it had no choice but to fall straight down. That does not mean that it suddenly uprighted itself.
So to you, an object that is tilted on an angle and falling on a corner has a center of gravity that is "squared" with "the force of gravity"? Uh, dipshit, gravity ALWAYS pulls DOWNWARDS, no matter WHERE the center of gravity is.
However, a tilted object has a center of gravity that is off to the side in the direction of the tilt, thus causing the SIDE of the object to be pulled downwards, causing it to tilt further if it is collapsing into what it is resting upon. Try putting a can of soup on top of your finger and see how long it takes for it to fall, and whether it falls through your finger or if it tumbles over.
"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
Despite all the photo evidence that I just provided you to the contrary?
You fool, do you see any buildings with the top section of the WTC impaled into them? The fact that debris was blown outwards is not the same as the tower falling over.
"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
Have you never seen the WTC collapse? Have you stuck your head up your ass all these years and refused to watch the videos which show how they collapsed?
Do I need to post some for you to see what happened?
"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
You obviously couldn't have been watching it too close if you were running away from it. There are many videos which show how it fell straight down, so nobody believes your bullshit about it falling over.
"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
The fact that debris was blown outwards is not the same as the tower falling over.
Wha...huh?
I challenge you to post a pic of any controlled demolition wherein the debris field was as far outside of its paramerers as it was at WTC...hell...the collpase of WTC 2 demolished the atrium of the WFC across the street...
When Pittsburgh had 3 Rivers Stadium brought down it stood yards from the new field which wasn't even scratched...
I challenge you to post a pic of any controlled demolition wherein the debris field was as far outside of its paramerers as it was at WTC
I challenge you to post a pic of ANY other 110 story building that has collapsed, whether by demolition or any other cause.
THEN you can compare apples to apples instead of apples to oranges.
"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
When Pittsburgh had 3 Rivers Stadium brought down it stood yards from the new field which wasn't even scratched...
BTW genius, bringing down an empty stadium with nothing but air inside it is a bit different than bringing down a 110 story skyscraper with a steel core.
"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
So what exactly are you trying to say here? Did it topple over or did it fall straight down into its own footprint?
"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
In other words, there ARE no examples of 110 story skyscapers falling down. So YOU cannot.
Here's a clue doofwipe...buildings brought down by demolition doesn't pulverize and strem "confetti" over a wide swath of earth. It IMplodes...
Explain how a solid steel core can implode. If there WERE demolitions going off on key floors throught the building, would you expect the debris to "implode" or to be ejected outwards?
"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
It collapsed in the manner gravity and then momentum affected it...to all points...
So it fell because of gravity. Hmmm, well why didn't it fall as soon as they built it then? Those 100 or so of UNDAMAGED floors dissolved into thin air, where even butter would have offered more resistance.
They must have been pretty weak huh. Good thing nobody ever jumped up and down or the whole thing would have gone down sooner, right?
"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
Nah, nah, it is because of the Magickal Jet Fuel™. A few drops of it hit building 7 too and so naturally it couldn't take it and had to fall down. I sure am glad they only made one batch of that. Just think, if they had made two or more batches of it the whole world would have probably just evaporated.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
Hmmm, well why didn't it fall as soon as they built it then?
Your questions are devolving further into stupidity. Engineering kept it standing...just as your legs do for you...take out your ligature around your knee and see if you don't topple over from being top heavy. IN the case of the WTC, floor trusses acted as ligature.
You forgot that it was Magickal Jet Fuel™ that can change properties at will and burn hotter than the sun. And they only ever made one batch of it and it was all used that day as evidenced by the fact that other skyscrapers have burned longer and fully engulfed since then, yet none of them fell. Not one. And some had burned before that day too and not one of those fell either. Steel skyscrapers just can't handle that Magickal Jet Fuel™.
All this makes me question an engineer who would design a building to take the direct impact of a jet and not take into account for that jet to be able to hit the building it had to be flying and be loaded with FUEL.
At the very least that explains alot of engineering blunders.LOL.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
All this makes me question an engineer who would design a building to take the direct impact of a jet and not take into account for that jet to be able to hit the building it had to be flying and be loaded with FUEL.
Oh, they did take it into account. The government and its shills are just lying about it. Why would any sane person believe that KEROSENE could cause steel-framed skyscrapers to fall? Many skyscrapers have had fires as intense, and even more intense, and for a longer period of time, yet the only ones that ever fell were the ones on 9/11. None before or since.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
Those buildings were hardly empty, dickwad. Carpet, chairs, wood, desks, plastic, PAPER...the buildings were FILLED with flammible materials...the jet fuel only started the fire...what was in the building is what fed and sustained it...
The stupidity of you folks is seemingly unboundless and gravity defying...
Oh, they did take it into account. The government and its shills are just lying about it. Why would any sane person believe that KEROSENE could cause steel-framed skyscrapers to fall? Many skyscrapers have had fires as intense, and even more intense, and for a longer period of time, yet the only ones that ever fell were the ones on 9/11. None before or since.
Yeah, isn't that ironic? I have seen the evidence that both sides present in this. In my heart I have to believe there was something evil at work here and I'm not refering to those that have been accused of the crime.
You know what I mean.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
Yeah, isn't that ironic? I have seen the evidence that both sides present in this. In my heart I have to believe there was something evil at work here and I'm not refering to those that have been accused of the crime.
You know what I mean.
The ones who are evil are the ones who blindly accept the government's lame-@$$ story about how kerosene burned down steel-framed skyscrapers. And if not evil then incredibly stupid or gullible and naive. I think it is the latter in most cases because I don't like to ascribe evil to people who just blindly accept the government's story no matter how stupid and far fetched it sounds.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The ones who are evil are the ones who blindly accept the government's lame-@$$ story about how kerosene burned down steel-framed skyscrapers. And if not evil then incredibly stupid or gullible and naive. I think it is the latter in most cases because I don't like to ascribe evil to people who just blindly accept the government's story no matter how stupid and far fetched it sounds.
Yeah, really, What the hell happened? I don't know what your age is but when I was growing up we were taught NOT to trust the government.
I guess their propaganda paid off.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
The "707" scenario was based upon the B-25 impact on the Empire State Building...moving slowly as if lost in the fog and low jet fuel...
If that was the true scenario. Wouldn't that be stupid on their part with an airport so CLOSE. Just asking.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
“Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,” said NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder. “Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail, initiating a fire-induced progressive collapse that brought the building down.”
“Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7,” Sunder said. The NIST investigation team also determined that other elements of the building’s construction—namely trusses, girders and cantilever overhangs that were used to transfer loads from the building superstructure to the columns of the electric substation (over which WTC 7 was constructed) and foundation below—did not play a significant role in the collapse.
You're saying that the WTC complex should not have been built because NY has airports?
Negative. Comment about your post 132.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
I don't know what your age is but when I was growing up we were taught NOT to trust the government.
I am old enough to know that you can't trust the government. They even allow a man to be president who refuses to show his actual birth certificate. One who has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of SOMEONE'S money to keep it hidden. You have to ask yourself why he refuses to spend ten or fifteen bucks to produce it instead of hundreds of thousands to keep it hidden. And it could be for one or maybe two reasons. One reason is that it could show that he was actually not born in the US at all but in Kenya. Another reason could be that it might show that the man he claims was his father was actually not his real father. I can't think of any reason besides those two that he refuses to show the actual birth certificate.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
I am old enough to know that you can't trust the government. They even allow a man to be president who refuses to show his actual birth certificate. One who has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of SOMEONE'S money to keep it hidden.
Well, that's a whole other story. At the very least they should be made to prove they are eligible for any office while they file their paperwork just like the rest of us would have to do.
One of Reagans quotes I really like is trust but verify. You'd think with all the smart asses in Washington someone would have thought of that.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
Well, that's a whole other story. At the very least they should be made to prove they are eligible for any office while they file their paperwork just like the rest of us would have to do.
The rest of us have to show an actual birth certificate to get a passport. Yet the Obamasiah can get someone to Photoshop some bs "CERTIFICATION" of Live Birth. I reckon he wanted to prove he wasn't hatched or something but it doesn't prove he was born in Hawaii like his disciples claim. This document is usually given to parties that don't have a proper hospital birth certificate and it is given based on a statement of one relative only. Even the state of Hawaii doesn't give full credit to these documents.
The primary documents used to show you are of age and a qualified native Hawaiian are:
* A certified copy of Certificate of Birth; * A certified copy of Certificate of Hawaiian Birth, including testimonies; or * A certified copy of Certificate of Delayed Birth.
You will need the certified birth certificates for:
* Yourself * Your biological father; and * Your biological mother
The state Department of Health, (DOH), Vital Records Section, records documents by island and district (geographically) and by the date of the event (chronologically).
If your biological parents' documents don't clearly prove that you have at least 50 percent Hawaiian ancestry, you will also need certified birth certificates for:
* Your biological father's parents; and * Your biological mother's parents.
In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.
This is what HAWAII says about the difference between the pos the Obamaphiles foisted off on the gullible saps who worship him and the Certificate of Live Birth. What he posted, or had someone to post on the internet, is not acceptable to Hawaii for proof of someone claiming to be Hawaiian.
The rest of us have to show an actual birth certificate to get a passport. Yet the Obamasiah can get someone to Photoshop some bs "CERTIFICATION" of Live Birth. I reckon he wanted to prove he wasn't hatched or something but it doesn't prove he was born in Hawaii like his disciples claim. This document is usually given to parties that don't have a proper hospital birth certificate and it is given based on a statement of one relative only. Even the state of Hawaii doesn't give full credit to these documents.
BINGO!!!
Hey have a good one I'm outta here. Good talking with you.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson
#152. To: FormerLurker, James Deffenbach, war (#125)
In other words, there ARE no examples of 110 story skyscapers falling down.
Sure there is...the WTC on 9/11....it was because of the Magickal Jet Fuel™ that can change properties at will and burn hotter than the sun. And they only ever made one batch of it and it was all used that day as evidenced by the fact that other skyscrapers have burned longer and fully engulfed since then, yet none of them fell. Not one. And some had burned before that day too and not one of those fell either. Steel skyscrapers just can't handle that Magickal Jet Fuel™.
Yeah, that was some potent stuff. If they had made one more big batch of it the whole world would have probably gone up in a big fireball if it ever detonated.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
This is absurd. Of course two planes hit the WTC towers. They weren't the planes we were told they were, but two planes hit them. Anyone saying no planes hit the WTC towers is putting out disinfo to discredit the 9/11 truth movement.
thats a good point. To clarify the text was not mine, but is from the person who posted it on youtube. I hadnt noticed they said that. i do believe that planes hit the towers.
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. "I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
The towers fell because the weigth bearing walls were actually the outside of the building.
Those core columns didn't do anything did they? They were just there to look pretty for the maintenance personnel that would see them. You know nothing of what you are speaking of regarding the structure of the WTC towers or the impossibility of a near free fall collapse occurring through a progressive "pancaking" of ANY building. I don't doubt you saw a plane hit the WTC building, but that hardly makes you an expert on this in any way.
So I hit the "p" key which is right next to the "o" key. Sue me...
I didn't say you spelled problem wrong, although you did, but that was a typo as well as 'the' which doesn't have a g in it. This is perfectly understandable especially considering how frustrated you might have been. You didn't spell stupid wrong, I did. I was kidding. Stupid is not spelled 'stoopid'.
I hope this clarifies things some.
"It is like a trance. So what can break a trance? The only thing that can break the trance is the light of truth." ~ Canadian Philosopher John McMurtry as he comments on the psychological warfare that has afflicted us all
That doesn't bother me. IT's not like this is the first time it's ever happened.
Being told that I don't think things through with any objective sense by someone who doesn't think things through with any objective sense bothers me. I'm not exactly sure why it does or if it should or not but it does. Sometimes more than other times. It's hypocrisy. Like being told to stop fucking swearing. Or being screamed at to relax. It's everywhere. It's enough to drive a person nuts. Like everyone's talking about global warming but noone says anything about the chemtrails. Like there not there. But they are. I just don't get it.
"It is like a trance. So what can break a trance? The only thing that can break the trance is the light of truth." ~ Canadian Philosopher John McMurtry as he comments on the psychological warfare that has afflicted us all
Being told that I don't think things through with any objective sense by someone who doesn't think things through with any objective sense bothers me. I'm not exactly sure why it does or if it should or not but it does. Sometimes more than other times. It's hypocrisy. Like being told to stop fucking swearing. Or being screamed at to relax. It's everywhere. It's enough to drive a person nuts. Like everyone's talking about global warming but noone says anything about the chemtrails. Like there not there. But they are. I just don't get it.
Because at this time on planet earth you are an oddity, like most of the rest of us here, you insist on thinking, examining, and determining a conclusion based on valid principles of reasoning. Sadly, that does make us odd in this programmed mind numbed dwindling culture where illiteracy is rampant and many consider good manners weakness.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
"If I were going to construct a God I would furnish him with some ways and qualities and characteristics which the Present One lacks... He would spend some of His eternities in trying to forgive Himself for making man unhappy when He could have made him happy with the same effort and He would spend the rest of them in studying astronomy." ~ Mark Twain
How many of them had a 450MPH impact and catastrophic explosion prior to the fire?
Your posts remind me a lot of this great analysis. He has your number.
Looniest Of All 911 Conspiracy Theories
By Gerard Holmgren 1-31-6
Astute observers of history are aware that for every notable event there will usually be at least one, often several wild conspiracy theories which spring up around it. 'The CIA killed Hendrix', 'The Pope had John Lennon murdered', 'Hitler was half Werewolf', 'Space aliens replaced Nixon with a clone' etc, etc. The bigger the event, the more ridiculous and more numerous are the fanciful rantings which circulate in relation to it. So its hardly surprising that the events of September 11th, 2001 have spawned their fair share of these ludicrous fairy tales. And as always, there is - sadly - a small but gullible percentage of the population eager to lap up these tall tales, regardless of facts or rational analysis.
One of the wilder stories circulating about September 11th - and one that has attracted something of a cult following amongst conspiracy buffs - is that it was carried out by nineteen fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, with no apparent motivation other than that they 'hate our freedoms.'
Never a group of people to be bothered by facts, the perpetrators of this cartoon fantasy have constructed an elaborately woven web of delusions and unsubstantiated hearsay in order to promote this garbage across the internet and the media to the extent that a number of otherwise rational people have actually fallen under its spell.
Normally I don't even bother debunking this kind of junk, but the effect that this paranoid myth is beginning to have requires a little rational analysis, in order to consign it to the same rubbish bin as all such silly conspiracy theories.
These crackpots even contend that the extremist Bush regime was caught unawares by the attacks, had no hand in organising them, and actually would have stopped them if it had been able. Blindly ignoring the stand down of the US air-force, the insider trading on airline stocks - linked to the CIA - the complicit behavior of Bush on the morning of the attacks, the controlled demolition of the WTC, the firing of a missile into the Pentagon and a host of other documented proofs that the Bush regime was behind the attacks, the conspiracy theorists stick doggedly to a silly story about nineteen Arab hijackers somehow managing to commandeer four planes simultaneously and fly them around US airspace for nearly two hours, crashing them into important buildings, without the US intelligence services having any idea that it was coming, and without the Air Force knowing what to do.
The huge difficulties with such a stupid story force them to invent even more preposturous stories to distract from its core silliness, and thus the tale has escalated into a mythic fantasy of truly gargantuan proportions.
It's difficult to apply rational analysis to such unmitigated stupidity, but that is the task which I take on in this article. However, it should be noted that one of the curious characteristics of conspiracy theorists is that they effortlessly change their so called evidence in response to each aspect which is debunked. As soon as one delusion is unmasked, they simply invent another to replace it, and deny that the first ever existed. Eventually, when they have turned full circle through this endlessly changing fantasy fog, they then re-invent the original delusion and deny that you ever debunked it, thus beginning the circle once more. This technique is known as 'the fruit loop' and saves the conspiracy theorist from ever having to see any of their ideas through to their (il)ogical conclusions.
According to the practitioners of the fruit loop, nineteen Arabs took over four planes by subduing the passengers and crew through the use of guns, knives, box cutters and gas, and then used electronic guidance systems which they had smuggled on board to fly the planes to their targets.
The suspension of disbelief required for this outrageous concoction is only for the hard core conspiracy theorist. For a start, they conveniently skip over the awkward fact that there weren't any Arabs on the planes. If there were, one must speculate that they somehow got on board without being filmed by any of the security cameras and without being registered on the passenger lists. But the curly question of how they are supposed to have got on board is all too mundane for the exciting world of the conspiracy theorist. With vague mumblings that they must have been using false ID - but never specifying which IDs they are alleged to have used, or how these were traced to their real identities - they quickly bypass this problem, to relate exciting and sinister tales about how some of the fictitious fiends were actually searched before boarding because they looked suspicious. However, as inevitably happens with any web of lies, this simply paints them into an even more difficult corner. How are they supposed to have got on board with all that stuff if they were searched ? And if they used gas in a confined space, they would have been affected themselves unless they also had masks in their luggage.
"Excuse me sir, why do you have a boxcutter, a gun, a container of gas, a gas mask and an electronic guidance unit in your luggage?"
"A present for your grandmother? Very well sir, on you get."
"Very strange", thinks the security officer, "that's the fourth Arabic man without an Arabic name who just got on board with a knife, gun or boxcutter and gas mask...and why does that security camera keep flicking off every time one these characters shows up? Must be one of those days I guess..."
Asking any of these basic questions to a conspiracy theorist is likely to cause a sudden leap to the claim that we know that they were on board because they left a credit card trail for the tickets they had purchased and cars they had rented. So if they used credit cards that identified them, how does that reconcile with the claim that they used false IDs to get on to the plane? But by this time , the fruit loop is in full swing, as the conspiracy theorist tries to stay one jump ahead of this annoying and awkward rational analysis. They will allege that the hijackers' passports were found at the crash scenes. "So there!" they exalt triumphantly, their fanatical faces lighting up with that deranged look of one who has just a revelation of questionable sanity.
Hmm? So they got on board with false IDs but took their real passports with them? However, by this time the fruit loop has been completely circumnavigated,and the conspiracy theorist exclaims impatiently, "who said anything about false IDs? We know what seats they were sitting in! Their presence is well documented!" And so the whole loop starts again. "Well, why aren't they on the passenger lists?" "You numbskull! They assumed the identities of other passengers!" And so on...
Finally, out of sheer fascination with this circular method of creative delusion, the rational sceptic will allow them to get away with this loop, in order to move on to the next question, and see what further delights await us in the unraveling of this marvelously stupid story.
"Uh, how come their passports survived fiery crashes that completely incinerated the planes and all the passengers? "The answer of course is that its just one of those strange coincidences, those little quirks of fate that do happen from time to time. You know, like the same person winning the lottery four weeks in a row. The odds are astronomical, but these things do happen.
This is another favourite deductive method of the conspiracy theorist. The 'improbability drive', in which they decide upon a conclusion without any evidence whatsoever to support it, and then continually speculate a series of wildly improbable events and unbelievable co-incidences to support it, shrugging off the implausibility of each event with the vague assertion that sometimes the impossible happens - just about all the time in their world. There is a principle called 'Occam's razor' which suggests that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the simplest explanation is most likely to be correct. Conspiracy theorists hate Occam's razor.
Having for the sake of amusement, allowed them to get away with with the silly story of the nineteen invisible Arabs, we move on to the question of how they are supposed to have taken over the planes.
Hijacking a plane is not an easy thing to do. Hijacking it without the pilot being able to alert ground control is near impossible. The pilot has only to punch in a four digit code to alert ground control to a hijacking. Unconcerned with the awkward question of plausibility, the conspiracy buffs maintain that on that September 11th, the invisible hijackers took over the plane by the rather crude method of threatening people with boxcutters and knives, and spraying gas - after they had attached their masks, obviously - but somehow took control of the plane without the crew first getting a chance to punch in the hijacking code. Not just on one plane, but on all four. At this point in the tale, the conspiracy theorist is again forced to call upon the services of the improbability drive.
So now that our incredibly lucky hijackers have taken control of the planes, all four pilots fly them with breath taking skill and certainty to their fiery end, all four pilots unflinching in their steely resolve for a swift meeting with Allah. Apart from their psychotic hatred of 'our freedoms', it was their fanatical devotion to Islam which enabled them to summon up the iron will to do this. Which is strange, because according to another piece of hearsay peddled by the conspiracy buffs, these guys actually went out drinking and womanizing the night before their great martyrdom, even leaving their Korans in the bar - really impeccable Islamic behavior - and then got up at 5 o'clock the next morning to pull off the greatest covert operation in history. This also requires us to believe that they were even clear headed enough to learn how to fly the huge planes by reading flight manuals in Arabic in the car on the way to the airport. We know this because they supposedly left the flight manuals there for us to find.
It gets better. Their practical training had allegedly been limited to Cessnas and flight simulators, but this was no barrier to the unflinching certainty with which they took over the planes and skillfully guided them to their doom. If they are supposed to have done their flight training with these tools, which would be available just about anywhere in the world, its not clear why they would have decided to risk blowing their cover to US intelligence services by doing the training in Florida, rather than somewhere in the Middle East, but such reasoning is foreign to the foggy world of the conspiracy theorist, too trapped in the constant rotation of the mental fruit loop to make their unsubstantiated fabrications seem even semi-believable.
Having triumphantly established a circular delusion in support of the mythical Arabs, the conspiracy theorist now confronts the difficult question of why there's nothing left of the planes. Anybody who has seen the endlessly replayed footage of the second plane going into the WTC will realize that the plane was packed with explosives. Planes do not and cannot blow up into nothing in that manner when they crash.
Did the mythical Arabs also haul a huge heap of explosives on board, and mange to deploy them in such a manner that they went off in the exact instant of the crash, completely vapourizing the plane? This is a little difficult even for the conspiracy theorist, who at this point decides that its easier to invent new laws of physics in order to keep the delusion rolling along.
There weren't any explosives. It wasn't an inside job. The plane blew up into nothing from its exploding fuel load! Remarkable, quite remarkable. Sluggishly combustible jet fuel which is basically Kerosene, and which burns at a maximum temperature of around 800 degrees Celcius has suddenly taken on the qualities of a ferociously explosive demolition agent, vapourising sixty-five tons of aircraft into a puff of smoke. Never mind that a plane of that size contains around fifteen tons of steel and titanium, of which even the melting points are about double that of the maximum combustion temperature of Kerosene - let alone the boiling point - which is what would be required to vapourise a plane. And then there's about fifty tons of aluminium to be accounted for. In excess of 15lbs of metal for each gallon of Kerosene.
For the conspiracy theorist, such inconvenient facts are vaguely dismissed as 'mumbo jumbo'. This convenient little phrase is their answer to just about anything factual or logical. Like a conjurer pulling a rabbit out of a hat, they suddenly become fanatically insistent about the devastating explosive qualities of Kerosene, something hitherto completely unknown to science, but just discovered by them, this very minute. Blissfully ignoring the fact that never before or since in aviation history has a plane vapourised into nothing from an exploding fuel load, the conspiracy theorist relies upon Hollywood images, where the effects are are always larger than life, and certainly larger than the intellects of these cretins.
"Its a well known fact that planes blow up into nothing on impact", they state with pompous certainty, "watch any Bruce Willis movie."
"Care to provide any documented examples? If it's a well known fact, then presumably this well known fact springs from some kind of documentation - other than Bruce Willis movies?"
At this point the mad but cunning eyes of the conspiracy theorist will narrow as they sense the corner that they have backed themselves into, and plan their escape by means of another stunning backflip.
"Ah, but planes have never crashed into buildings before, so there's no way of telling." they counter with a sly grin. Well, actually planes have crashed into buildings before and since, and not vapourised into nothing. "But not big planes, with that much fuel", they shriek in hysterical denial. Or that much metal to vapourise.
"Yes but not hijacked planes!" "Are you suggesting that whether the crash is deliberate or accidental affects the combustion qualities of the fuel?" "Now you're just being silly".
Although collisions with buildings are rare, planes frequently crash into mountains, streets, other aircraft, nosedive into the ground, or have bombs planted aboard them, and don't vapourise into nothing. What's so special about a tower that's mostly glass? But by now, the conspiracy theorist has once again sailed happily around the fruit loop. "It's a well documented fact that planes explode into nothing on impact."
Effortlessly weaving back and forth between the position that its a "well known fact" and that "its never happened before, so we have nothing to compare it to", the conspiracy theorist has now convinced themselves - if not too many other people - that the WTC plane was not loaded with explosives, and that the instant vapourisation of the plane in a massive fireball was the same as any other plane crash you might care to mention. Round and round the fruit loop.
But the hurdles which confront the conspiracy theorist are many, and they are now forced to implement even more creative uses for the newly discovered shockingly destructive qualities of Kerosene. They have to explain how the Arabs also engineered the elegant veritcal collapse of both the WTC towers, and for this awkward fact the easiest counter is to simply deny that it was a controlled demolition, and claim that the buildings collapsed from fire caused by the burning Kerosene.
For this, its necessary to sweep aside the second law of thermodynamics and propose Kerosene which is not only impossibly destructive, but also recycles itself for a second burning in violation of the law of degradation of energy. You see, it not only consumed itself in a sudden catastrophic fireball , vapourising a sixty-five ton plane into nothing, but then came back for a second go, burning at 2000 degrees centigrade for another hour at the impact point, melting the skyscraper's steel like butter. And while it was doing all this it also poured down the elevator shafts, starting fires all through the building. When I was at school there was a little thing called the entropy law which suggests that a given portion of fuel can only burn once, something which is readily observable in the real world, even for those who didn't make it to junior high school science. But this is no problem for the conspiracy theorist. Gleefully, they claim that a few thousand gallons of Kerosene is enough to:
- Completely vapourise a sixty-five ton aircraft
- Have enough left over to burn ferociously enough for over an hour at the impact point to melt steel - melting point about double the maximum combustion temperature of the fuel
- Still have enough left over to pour down the elevator shafts and start similarly destructive fires all through the building
This Kerosene really is remarkable stuff! How chilling to realize that those Kerosene heaters we had in the house when I was a kid were deadly bombs, just waiting to go off. One false move and the entire street might have been vapourised. And never again will I take Kerosene lamps out camping. One moment you're there innocently holding the lamp - the next - kapow! Vapourised into nothing along with with the rest of the camp site, and still leaving enough of the deadly stuff to start a massive forest fire.
These whackos are actually claiming that the raging inferno allegedly created by the miraculously recycling, and impossibly hot burning Kerosene melted or at least softened the steel supports of the skyscraper. Oblivious to the fact that the black smoke coming from the WTC indicates an oxygen starved fire - therefore not particularly hot - they trumpet an alleged temperature in the building of 2000 degrees centigrade, without a shred of evidence to support this curious suspension of the laws of physics.
Not content with this ludicrous garbage, they then contend that as the steel frames softened, they came straight down instead of buckling and twisting and falling sideways.
Since they're already re-engineered the combustion qualities of jet fuel, violated the second law of thermodynamics, and redefined the structural properties of steel, why let a little thing like the laws of gravity get in the way?
The tower fell in a time almost identical to that of a free falling object, dropped from that height, meaning that its physically impossible for it to have collapsed by the method of the top floors smashing through the lower floors. But according to the conspiracy theorists, the laws of gravity were temporarily suspended on the morning of September 11th. It appears that the evil psychic power of those dreadful Arabs knew no bounds. Even after they were dead, they were able, by the power of their evil spirits, to force down the tower at a speed physically impossible under the laws of gravity, had it been meeting any resistance from fireproofed steel structures originally designed to resist many tons of hurricane force wind as well as the impact of a Boeing passenger jet straying off course.
Clearly, these conspiracy nuts never did their science homework at school, but did become extremely adept at inventing tall tales for why. "Muslim terrorists stole my notes,Sir." "No Miss, the Kerosene heater blew up and vapourised everything in the street, except for my passport." "You see Sir, the schoolbus was hijacked by Arabs who destroyed my homework because they hate our freedoms."
Or perhaps they misunderstood the term 'creative science' and mistakenly thought that coming up with such rubbish was in fact, their science homework.
The ferocious heat generated by this ghastly Kerosene was, according to the conspiracy theorists, the reason why so many of the WTC victims can't be identified. DNA is destroyed by heat - although 2000 degrees centigrade isn't really required, 100 degrees centigrade will generally do the job. This is quite remarkable, because according to the conspiracy theorist, the nature of DNA suddenly changes if you go to a different city.
That's right, if you are killed by an Arab terrorist in New York, your DNA will be destroyed by such temperatures. But if you are killed by an Arab terrorist in Washington, your DNA will be so robust that it can survive temperatures which completely vapourise a sixty-five ton aircraft.
You see, these loonies have somehow concocted the idea that the missile which hit the pentagon was not a missile at all, but one of the hijacked planes. And to prove this unlikely premise, they point to a propaganda statement from the Bush regime, which rather stupidly claims that all but one of the people aboard the plane were identified from the site by DNA testing, even though nothing remains of the plane. The plane was vapourised by the fuel tank explosion, maintain these space loonies, but the people inside it were all but one identified by DNA testing.
So there we have it. The qualities of DNA are different, depending upon which city you're in, or perhaps depending upon which fairy story you're trying to sell at any particular time.
This concoction about one of the hijacked planes hitting the Pentagon really is a howler. For those not familiar with the layout of the Pentagon, it consists of 5 rings of building, each with a space inbetween. Each ring of building is about 30-35 feet deep, with a similar amount of open space between it and the next ring. The object which penetrated the Pentagon went in at about a 45 degree angle, punching a neat circular hole of about a 12 foot diameter through three rings - six walls. A little later a section of wall about 65 foot wide collapsed in the outer ring. Since the plane which the conspiracy theorists claim to be responsible for the impact had a wing span of 125 feet and a length of 155 feet, and there was no wreckage of the plane, either inside or outside the building, and the lawns outside were still smooth and green enough to play golf on, this crazy delusion is clearly physically impossible.
But hey, we've already disregarded the combustion qualities of jet fuel, the normal properties of common building materials, the properties of DNA, the laws of gravity and the second law of thermodynamics, so what the hell - why not throw in a little spatial impossibility as well? I would have thought that the observation that a solid object cannot pass through another solid object without leaving a hole at least as big as itself is reasonably sound science. But to the conspiracy theorist, this is 'mumbo jumbo'. It conflicts with the delusion that they're hooked on, so it 'must be wrong' although trying to get them to explain exactly how it could be wrong is a futile endeavour.
Conspiracy theorists fly into a curious panic whenever the Pentagon missile is mentioned. They nervously maintain that the plane was vapourised by it's exploding fuel load, and point to the WTC crash as evidence of this behavior. That's a wonderful fruit loop. Like an insect which has just been sprayed, running back and forth in its last mad death throes, they first argue that the reason the hole is so small is that the plane never entered the wall, having blown up outside, and then suddenly backflip to explain the 250 foot deep missile hole by saying that the plane disappeared all the way into the building, and then blew up inside the building - even though the building shows no sign of such damage. As for what happened to the wings - here's where they get really creative. The wings snapped off and folded into the fuselage which then carried them into the building, which then closed up behind the plane like a piece of meat.
When it suits them, they'll also claim that the plane slid in on its belly - ignoring the undamaged lawn - while at the same time citing alleged witnesses to the plane diving steeply into the building from an 'irrecoverable angle.' How they reconcile these two scenarios as being compatible is truly a study in stupidity.
Once they get desperate enough, you can be sure that the UFO conspiracy stuff will make an appearance. The Arabs are in league with the Martians. Space aliens snatched the remains of the Pentagon plane and fixed most of the hole in the wall, just to confuse people. They gave the Arabs invisibility pills to help get them onto the planes. Little green men were seen talking to Bin Laden a few weeks prior to the attacks.
As America gears up to impeach the traitor Bush, and stop his perpetual oil war, it's not helpful to have these idiots distracting from the process by spreading silly conspiracy theories about mythical Arabs, stories which do nothing but play into the hands of the extremist Bush regime.
At a less serious time, we might tolerate such crackpots with amused detachment, but they need to understand that the treachery that was perpetrated on September 11th, and the subsequent war crimes committed in 'retaliation' are far too serious for us to allow such frivolous self indulgence to go unchallenged.
Those who are truly addicted to conspiracy delusions should find a more appropriate outlet for their paranoia.
Its time to stop loony conspiracy theories about September 11th.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
BTW, in case you handn't noticed, there is not one point that you have raised that has not been shown to be bullshit,
You're great at projection war. That's about it though, other than your mastery of that character trait, you are nothing but a naive little kid who's all grown up and can't understand why those bad mooselums hate us for our freedom, yet swallows that tale as if it came from God Himself.
I don't have time to waste with someone who is either playing stupid, or IS stupid. If you want to believe in fairy tales that is your right, but don't condemn those who don't believe them, capeesh?
"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
I don't have time to waste with someone who is either playing stupid, or IS stupid.
O come on FL.
I mean Law Enforcement found the passports in the hundred million tons of flaming debris the next day and had photos of them the day after that in all the newspapers.
We are so fortunate to be protected by such a capable police authority.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
Being told that I don't think things through with any objective sense by someone who doesn't think things through with any objective sense bothers me. I'm not exactly sure why it does or if it should or not but it does. Sometimes more than other times. It's hypocrisy. Like being told to stop fucking swearing. Or being screamed at to relax. It's everywhere. It's enough to drive a person nuts. Like everyone's talking about global warming but noone says anything about the chemtrails. Like there not there. But they are. I just don't get it.
LOL!
I know exactly what you are saying. Exactly.
Here's what works for me. Your mileage may vary.
1) First and foremost: I know I will not change anyones mind. I dont have that kind of power and if I could force them to see it, I wouldn't. There's wisdom in the saying about leading horses to water but you cant make them drink.
2) No one made me see anything. I saw it for myself. THEN and only then did I learn from other people.
They provided LATERAL stability/ Teh floor trusses ran from the core to the outer support once the trusses detached [as they had to the oputwer support at impact] from the core, there was virtually nothing holding the upper structuire to the bottom.
You know nothing of what you are speaking of regarding the structure of the WTC towers
Sure I do. Putting aide the fact that I did a college level paper on its construction which required a good deal of research, I've read most of the Moonbat stuff and cross referenced it to the investigation. That said, the most important fact that I knew all alopnog was that the buildings vertical support was in its outer walls [the WTC was a hollow tube or pipe that was then "filled in"] and its lateral support was in individual trusses strung between the core and the outer structure.
I've yet to see any of the Moonbat stuff hold up under "Cross examination".
or the impossibility of a near free fall collapse
It didn't...tehre was a 3-4 second difference in how the Towers collapsed versus Free Fall speed which, if you know anything about physics, is a HUGE time gap.
but that hardly makes you an expert on this in any way.
This Kerosene really is remarkable stuff! How chilling to realize that those Kerosene heaters we had in the house when I was a kid were deadly bombs, just waiting to go off. One false move and the entire street might have been vapourised. And never again will I take Kerosene lamps out camping. One moment you're there innocently holding the lamp - the next - kapow! Vapourised into nothing along with with the rest of the camp site, and still leaving enough of the deadly stuff to start a massive forest fire.
These whackos are actually claiming that the raging inferno allegedly created by the miraculously recycling, and impossibly hot burning Kerosene melted or at least softened the steel supports of the skyscraper. Oblivious to the fact that the black smoke coming from the WTC indicates an oxygen starved fire - therefore not particularly hot - they trumpet an alleged temperature in the building of 2000 degrees centigrade, without a shred of evidence to support this curious suspension of the laws of physics.
Magickal Jet Fuel™. (Great post).
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
They fell in about 10-11 seconds where free fall through air would have been a little over 9 seconds. So you're wrong.
Wha...chuckle huh...your just posted that they fell at a time at odds with Free Fall speed...
Putting aside thatthey actually fell even slower than the times you provide, gravity works at 32 feet per second per second...those 2-3 seconds are HUGE in terms of resistence.
For one, the steel core bore the majority of the weight
Nope. The outer walls did. The core provided vertical stability.
Bullshit. Even if true, WTC7 was internally reinforced.
You think that a structure such as WTC7 would simply collapse like a deck of cards due to a relatively small internal fire a bit of damage to an exterior wall?
The collapse of 7 was directlyy attriibuted to one of three vertical support beams being compromised over 13 floors by the heat from the fires.
The individuals listed as the hijackers are not said to be using aliases
If they weren't who they said that then what else could they have been using?
That's about it though, other than your mastery of that character trait, you are nothing but a naive little kid who's all grown up and can't understand why those bad mooselums hate us for our freedom, yet swallows that tale as if it came from God Himself.
I don't believe that the Moslems hate us for our freedoms. I believe that they hate us because we are one in a series of western powers who have invaded their lands to exploit natural resources for profit and in so doing have taken one side or another in long standing blood fueds.
I mean Law Enforcement found the passports in the hundred million tons of flaming debris the next day and had photos of them the day after that in all the newspapers.
They had the passenger manifests of the flights which included the hijackers who were here on visas that required a file photo.
#183. To: James Deffenbach, FormerLurker, Wudidiz, TwentyTwelve, christine, all (#173)
What I find dreadfully amusing is that after all of the mountains of evidence that have been dug up and presented that the shills keep trying to push the same discredited spin invented to keep people from concluding the deadly obvious:
911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.
Always they use the same disinfo tactics - focus on one or two small elements that can be made to sound confusing, reference the government reports that have been repeatedly proven false or untenable (like paper and wood furniture burn hot enough to melt steel), and when again, for the gazillionth time shown to be false, the go through the "Fruit Loop" again.
It would be really funny except that you have to step back and look at the reality: 3,000 people were murdered in a massive government PsyOp for Political purposes and to cow people into surrendering their freedom for security. To surrender their freedom for protection from the people who committed the mass murder.
Anyone who would defend such actions and attempt to explain it away is despicable and a sadly repellant excuse for a supposedly sentient entity.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
And, the architects/engineers admitted that the 767 hits were outside of the parameters of their "707 scenario".
And you can of course present evidence to support that lie?
I didn't think so.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
The two towers were the first structures outside of the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airliner, the Boeing 707. It was assumed that the jetliner would be lost in the fog, seeking to land at JFK or at Newark. To the best of our knowledge, little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance. Indeed, at that time, no fireproofing systems were available to control the effects of such fires.
Figure 3 shows the comparative energy of impact for the Mitchell bomber that hit the Empire State Building during World War II, a 707, and a 767. The energy contained in the fuel is shown in Figure 4. Considerations of larger aircraft are shown in Figures 5 and 6. The physical sizes of these aircraft are compared with the size of the floor plate of one of the towers in Figure 7. These charts demonstrate conclusively that we should not and cannot design buildings and structures to resist the impact of these aircraft. Instead, we must concentrate our efforts on keeping aircraft away from our tall buildings, sports stadiums, symbolic buildings, atomic plants, and other potential targets.
I mean Law Enforcement found the passports in the hundred million tons of flaming debris the next day and had photos of them the day after that in all the newspapers.
They had the passenger manifests of the flights which included the hijackers who were here on visas that required a file photo.
Another lie. The Flight Manifests were published and showed up on the Internet.
NONE OF THE SUPPOSED HIJACKERS NAMES SHOW UP ON ANY OF THE FLIGHT MANIFESTS.
NONE OF THE HIJACKERS WERE PHOTOGRAPHED BY SECURITY CAMERAS BORDING THE PLANES.
SEVERAL OF THE HIJACKER WERE TRAINED AT U.S. GOVERNMENT INTSTALLATIONS.
AT LAST COUNT 7 (if memory serves) WERE ALIVE AND ELSEWHERE THE DAY OF AND AFTER THE 911 PSYOP.
At this point all you are doing is regurgitating the same discredited lines of bullshit that have been planted all over the Web to try to discredit the obvious conclusion: 911 was committed with the full and knowing complicity of elements within the U.S. Feral Government.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
What I find dreadfully amusing is that after all of the mountains of evidence that have been dug up and presented that the shills keep trying to push the same discredited spin invented to keep people from concluding the deadly obvious:
WHAT EVIDENCE? EVery bit of evidence presented by you Moonbats doesn't withstand the most minimal amount of scrutiny.
James Doofenbog keeps trying to claim that the government concluded that kerosense "magic jet fuel" brought the towers down. He says this in full face of me posting the final government report which SPECIFICALLY states that the jet fule did not.
Tell me tha tthe government ignored warnings and was asleep at the swtich and I'll have an easier time believing you as I believe that ample evidence exists for that - Rice's perjury to the 9/11 Commission alone is compelliung. But, tell me that the government brought the Towers down without being able to ptovide even a minimal amount of evidence thereunto and I'll call you a Moonbat.
Anyone who would defend such actions and attempt to explain it away is despicable and a sadly repellant excuse for a supposedly sentient entity.
Yeah, all that yammering about just regular stuff you would find in any office burning and melting steel is pretty sad. Only mind addled, tv-addicted zombies would believe such stupid stuff.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The Globe said according to the manifest, Mohamed Atta, one of the suspected terrorists, was assigned seat 8D in business class on American Airlines Flight 11, directly across the aisle from Hollywood producer David Angell and his wife, Lynn, who were in seats 8A and 8B, respectively. Seated next to Atta in seat 8G was Abdul Alomari. FBI investigators have searched Alomari's home in Vero Beach.
The Globe reported the passenger list for United Air Lines Flight 175 shows that Marwan Alshehri got on the plane that left Boston and slammed into one of the Manhattan skyscrapers 15 minutes after Flight 11. An FAA pilot directory information spelled his name Marwan Alshehhi.
But, tell me that the government brought the Towers down without being able to ptovide even a minimal amount of evidence thereunto and I'll call you a Moonbat.
The evidence is overwhelming the government was involved in the destruction of the WTC towers. The fact you can't see it says a lot about your intelligence level.
The Boston Globe September 13, 2001, Thursday ,THIRD EDITION
ATTACK AFTERMATH / A NATION SEARCHES Shelley Murphy, Ralph Ranalli, Stephen Kurkjian, John Donnelly, Michael Rezendes, Wayne Washington, Sally Jacobs, Farah Stockman, and Judy Rakowsky of the Globe Staff contributed to this story. Globe correspondents Broward Liston and Fran Riley also assisted.; 12 SUSPECTS EYED IN HIJACKINGS; GRIM SEARCH FOR VICTIMS GOES ON 3 MEN TRAINED TO BE PILOTS ARE KEY TO PROBE
BYLINE: By Kevin Cullen and Matthew Brelis, Globe Staff
SECTION: NATIONAL/FOREIGN; Pg. A1
Three men who were trained as pilots have emerged as the central figures in the hijacking of two Boston-to-Los Angeles flights that were deliberately crashed into the World Trade Center towers.
The trio are among a dozen men with Arabic surnames who were the focus yesterday of the massive investigation here trying to determine who commandeered the two Boeing 767s that formed half of the biggest terrorist attack ever against Americans.
Sources close to the investigation said that investigators had recovered from a car rented by a suspected hijacker a so-called "ramp pass," which gives the holder access to restricted areas at Logan Airport. Evidence also suggests the rental car was used to case the airport during the week leading up to the attack.
As investigators retraced the steps of the men, using an extensive list of Visa credit card receipts, evidence pointing to the plot having its roots in the Middle East was piling up.
The names of the 12 men with Arabic surnames were not on a passenger list made public yesterday by American Airlines and United Air Lines, whose planes were hijacked Tuesday morning. But The Boston Globe obtained the complete list, and law enforcement sources confirmed that they were focusing on up to a dozen of the Arabic men as they piece together how the two Boston flights were hijacked.
One of the suspects, Mohamed Atta, 33, is a Saudi national who trained as an airline pilot. The other two, Waleed Alshehri and Marwan Alshehri, are believed to be brothers from the United Arab Emirates, and are also trained to fly heavy commercial aircraft like the ones that were commandeered and flown into the World Trade Center towers in New York.
Both Atta, who attended a flight school in Florida last year, and Waleed Alshehri received training that would have made them capable of flying American Airlines Flight 11 into the first of the two towers that later collapsed, killing what officials assume will be thousands of office workers and hundreds of their would-be rescuers.
Marwan Alshehri, who attended flight school with Atta, was capable of flying United Air Lines Flight 175 into one of the towers, investigators believe.
Atta caught Flight 11 off a connecting flight from Portland, Maine. Two bags with Atta's name tags were on the Portland flight, but did not get transferred in time to be loaded on the Los Angeles-bound flight that left Logan Airport at 7:59 a.m., about 45 minutes before it smashed into the World Trade Center tower.
Acccording to the manifest, Atta was assigned seat 8D in business class on Flight 11, directly across the aisle from Hollywood producer David Angell and his wife, Lynn, who were in seats 8A and 8B respectively. Seated next to Atta in seat 8G was Abdul Alomari. The two remaining seats in Row 8, H and J, were unassigned.
The passenger list for Flight 175 shows that Marwan Alshehri got on the plane that left Boston and slammed into one of the Manhattan skyscrapers 15 minutes after Flight 11.
A Florida man, Charles Voss, yesterday said that Atta and a man whom he knew only as Marwan had stayed at his home last year while they obtained flight training at a Florida flight school. Voss, who used to work at Huffman Aviation in Venice, Fla., told the Associated Press that the FBI agents who interviewed him Tuesday told him that the two men who stayed at his home were involved in the hijackings. Azzan Ali, a student at Huffman Aviation, said that Marwan Alshehri had stayed with Voss.
Voss said the FBI told him that the two men who had stayed with him last year had been traced to a car found at Logan Airport. Law enforcement sources told the Globe that authorities had recovered from the car a a ramp pass issued by the Massachusetts Port Authority.
Waleed Alshehri also held a commercial pilot's license and was rated to fly large, multi-engine aircraft.
On Tuesday night, Massachusetts State Police detectives and the FBI seized a Mitsubishi sedan that a Hampden County law enforcement official said one of the suspected hijackers rented in Springfield and that was parked in a Logan Airport parking lot. When they reviewed videotape of the parking lot's surveillance camera, investigators found that the car had entered the lot up to five times between last Wednesday and Tuesday, according to sources. Those sources said the constant presence of the car over the last week suggested that the terrorists had scouted the airport, or performed dry runs for the daring attack.
Sources familiar with the investigation said the ramp pass, found in the Mitsubishi sedan, gives holders access to restricted parts of the airport.
Sources said at least five one-way tickets for the United flight and at least two similar tickets for the American flight were purchased at the last minute by suspected hijackers. The sources said at least four of the tickets were purchased with the same Visa card.
One state official who spoke on condition of anonymity expressed deep regret that airline officials did not react more cautiously regarding the ticket purchases.
"That is something that should jump out at you," said the state official. "One- way ticket, purchased by Arabic gentlemen; that should have been red-flagged."
One source said the car had been parked at least "four to five" times at Logan since Sept. 5.
Meanwhile, authorities in Florida were investigating the possibility that two suspected terrorists, including Waleed Alshehri, prepared for the attacks on New York and Washington while at Embry-Riddle Aeronautics University in Daytona Beach - one as a student and one while working as an instructor.
In a statement yesterday, university officials said they are cooperating with the FBI and other investigative agencies and would provide no further information.
But the Globe found Waleed Alshehri's name on a list of 1997 Embry graduates. The FBI Tuesday evening searched a Daytona Beach apartment where Alshehri lived during the time he is believed to have attended Embry.
The Globe reported yesterday that inside the suitcase belonging to Atta, investigators found a Saudi passport, an international driver's license, a videotape on how to fly a Boeing 757 and 747, and "some kind of religious cassette tape." Atta has previously held an Egyptian driver's license.
State Police and the FBI spent much of yesterday searching a unit of the Park Inn off Route 9 in Chestnut Hill, where at least two of the hijackers were believed to have stayed the night before the attack. At noon, more than a dozen law enforcement vehicles parked behind the hotel, and officers, some clad in bullet-proof vests and bearing shields, assembled on the third floor of the inn.
The unit of the inn, formerly the Susse Chalet, is under renovation and only a few rooms were occupied, according to one of its managers.
FBI investigators spent about 15 hours in Room 432 of the inn yesterday, painstakingly analyzing and removing evidence, including a recliner as well as several boxes and bags of material. The operation started at 6 a.m., according to other guests at the inn, who returned last night to find they were being moved to other buildings in the complex.
All the guests were moved out of the building except Michael Arnold, of Nantucket, who was staying in the room next to 432 and was allowed to go in and shave last evening.
Arnold had noticed the two men staying in the room next to his, where he said the FBI told him they found a flight schedule and a train schedule. But he said he had not noticed anything unusual about the men.
While authorities were busy retracing the steps of Atta and his suspected co- conspirators, the fluid nature of the investigation was made evident as police aggressively followed any potential lead, sometimes catching up in their dragnet people who simply appeared suspicious to a jumpy public.
In one case, three Arabs, including at least one with the same last name as one of the suspected hijackers, were taken into custody yesterday afternoon at the Westin Copley Place Hotel in a dramatic swoop by FBI agents, State Police detectives, and a heavily armored Boston police SWAT team. Several blocks surrounding the hotel were sealed off, and thousands of curious and nervous bystanders watched the police operation. But within a few hours, the three people who were taken in for questioning had been ruled out as being involved in the hijackings, sources said.
An employee at the Budget Car and Truck Rental office inside the Westin said several Arab guests at the hotel who attempted to rent a car yesterday morning were considered suspicious, prompting the call to police.
At about 3 p.m., Providence police stopped an Amtrak train heading from Boston to Washington, just outside the Providence train station. While police were looking for people wanted for questioning, Providence Police Colonel Richard T. Sullivan said a man taken from the train and arrested for carrying a large knife was not linked to the hijackings.
Within hours of the second plane hitting the twin towers on Tuesday, the FBI was on the phone to Boston police, asking for all their files on licensing of Boston cab drivers and saying they were looking for information on all drivers, past and present, of Arabic descent, according to sources familiar with the investigation. The department's computerized database with the names of about 7,000 people who have been licensed as Boston cab drivers since the mid-1990s was provided. According to one source, the names of "hundred and hundreds" of people of Arabic descent are in the database.
Boston police were told that authorities were not focusing on a particular individual or individuals for the terrorist acts, the officials said. However, the federal authorities said that since the names of several cab drivers with ties to Osama bin Laden had become known after the bombing of the USS Cole, they wanted to check to see if those whose names may come up in this investigation had any similar Boston ties, the officials said.
In Washington, meanwhile, US officials were trying to determine whether the hijackers were linked to the Saudi-born, anti-American terrorist bin Laden.
Asked if the hijackers could belong to other terror groups, one US official said, "Bin Laden's organization is a lot of different groups loosely aligned with him, so sure it's possible. But all the individuals are commonly linked to him."
US officials were sorting through "thousands" of leads yesterday at the FBI, State Department, Defense Department, and various intelligence agencies. A second US official, based in the State Department, said they were also receiving an unusually heavy number of threats against US targets.
"We're sorting out what may be real and what are just copycats," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "We're looking at literally thousands of pieces of information, trying to establish one line that more or less makes the most sense."
Search warrants have been executed in states other than Florida, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, but those warrants are sealed because they contain information investigators believe could hinder their pursuit of those responsible for Tuesday's attack, a Justice Department official said.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, the official would not say how many warrants have been issued or identify the other states.
Law enforcement officials have been slow to confirm information reported about the attacks.
#197. To: war, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, tom007, litus, christine, all (#186)
No one said anything about "resisting" the impact.
The buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a 707 - which you can try to obfuscate but cannot refute.
The difference is size between a 707 and a 767 is relatively small and the 707 had a larger fuel capacity due to a less efficient, earlier, design.
The aircraft were not fully loaded with fuel, admitted in the FEMA report, as it is standard practice to load only enough fuel to make the scheduled flight plus 10% for a margin of safety. Thus the aircraft had about 10,000 gallons of fuel - less than their capacity.
JP 8 (Kerosene) does not burn hot enough even under ideal conditions in a forced air furnace (for example a Jet Engine) to melt steel. Witness the fact that airliners don't crash because the fuel melted the engines.
Paper and Wood are elements of a Class Alpha Fire and do not, even under ideal laboratory conditions, get hot enough to melt steel and there was insufficient quantities to even soften the steel as the steel girder framework acts like a heat sink dispersing the head throughout the structure and thus keeping the temperature down below the critical points.
A localized fire cannot cause a uniform symmetrical simultaneous collapse. The normal failure pattern in a catastrophic structural failure is for there to be a point of greatest weakness. The failure occurs at the weak point first which results in an ASYMMETRICAL failure with the structure moving toward the point of failure. It does not occur simultaneously in 360 degrees causing a uniform symmetrical failure. The uniform symmetrical failure is itself evidence of controlled demolition.
Further in true shill fashion once it was pointed out that the box column center of the building is the primary load bearing structure of the building design you simply followed the fruit loop pattern of avoiding it, denying it, and the trying to shift the debate away from that which you cannot dispute.
You are a liar, are shown to be a liar, and intentionally so. You are either a Shill or an Idiot and at this point Shill is most likely given your repeated use of disinformation tactics.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
The buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a 707 - which you can try to obfuscate but cannot refute.
Let's see...am I to take the word of an internet Moonbat arguing with the words of the structural engineer or the word of the structural engineer, himself...hmmm...ah....uh...hmmm...what a ponderable...? [snicker]
too bad for you that the WTC fires were not localized...but...suspending disblief for the momenbt and stipulating that they were...they were localized to an area already catostrophically damaged and vital to the structure's support...
That's right, if you are killed by an Arab terrorist in New York, your DNA will be destroyed by such temperatures. But if you are killed by an Arab terrorist in Washington, your DNA will be so robust that it can survive temperatures which completely vapourise a sixty-five ton aircraft.
You see, these loonies have somehow concocted the idea that the missile which hit the pentagon was not a missile at all, but one of the hijacked planes. And to prove this unlikely premise, they point to a propaganda statement from the Bush regime, which rather stupidly claims that all but one of the people aboard the plane were identified from the site by DNA testing, even though nothing remains of the plane. The plane was vapourised by the fuel tank explosion, maintain these space loonies, but the people inside it were all but one identified by DNA testing.
So there we have it. The qualities of DNA are different, depending upon which city you're in, or perhaps depending upon which fairy story you're trying to sell at any particular time.
Magickal Jet Fuel™ AND Magickal DNA™! My goodness, who woulda thunk it?!?!
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
which rather stupidly claims that all but one of the people aboard the plane were identified from the site by DNA test
“DNA extractions were done on every one of the 19,906 remains, and 4,735 of those have been identified. As many as 200 remains have been linked to a single person. Of the 1,401 people identified include 45 of those aboard the hijacked planes - 33 from Flight 11, which struck the north tower, and 12 from Flight 175, which hit the south tower.”...
~snip~
Your penchant for accuracy is surpassed only by that of Wrong Way Corrigan's...
"If I were going to construct a God I would furnish him with some ways and qualities and characteristics which the Present One lacks... He would spend some of His eternities in trying to forgive Himself for making man unhappy when He could have made him happy with the same effort and He would spend the rest of them in studying astronomy." ~ Mark Twain
Further in true shill fashion once it was pointed out that the box column center of the building is the primary load bearing structure of the building design you simply followed the fruit loop pattern of avoiding it, denying it, and the trying to shift the debate away from that which you cannot dispute.
Ground was broken on August 5th, 1966. The project began with excavation six stories down to bedrock where the towers’ footings would stand. Crews dug around the PATH train tubes within the site, removing one million cubic yards of earth that would eventually form Battery Park City.
Site preparations were vast and included an elaborate method of foundation work for which a “bathtub” had to be built 65 feet below grade. The bathtub was made of a bentonite (absorbent clay) slurry wall meant to keep out groundwater and the Hudson River. Tie-backs were inserted through the wall and anchored at an angle in the earth behind them.
The foundation construction was just a fraction of many innovations masterminded by Yamasaki and team. Among them were the Twin Towers’ high-speed elevators, sky lobbies, and a “hollow tube” building model that distributed weight from the inner core across floor trusses to the exterior’s closely spaced steel columns. The load-bearing exterior also served as bracing against wind. Floor trusses and exterior-wall panels were prefabricated before being lifted and bolted into place, speeding construction.
The first tenants moved into 1 WTC, the north tower, in 1970, and two years later into 2 WTC. The Port Authority’s construction costs totaled more than $900 million.
To supply power to the 10048 zip code—which was dedicated solely to the WTC site—Con Edison built an electrical substation across Vesey Street in 1967. Atop the substation developer Silverstein Properties built a 47-story, red masonry tower, known as Seven World Trade Center, in 1987.
The buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a 707 - which you can try to obfuscate but cannot refute.
Because the 767s were traveling at high speeds, were somewhat larger than 707s and each carried about 80 tons of jet fuel, Robertson said, “the energy that was absorbed by the impact was not less than three-times, and probably as much as six-times greater than the impact we had considered.
once it was pointed out that the box column center of the building is the primary load bearing structure of the building design you simply followed the fruit loop pattern of avoiding it, denying it, and the trying to shift the debate away from that which you cannot dispute.
This revolutionary construction system was a major change from the conventional system that used steel i-beams throughout the structure with non-structural exterior curtain walls. Prior to this time, curtain walls were used primarily to keep the elements out and were non-load bearing. All wind loads were transferred through the floor membrane and supported by the core of the structure. This new hollow tube system design resulted in a light and economical structure using only half the amount of steel required in a conventional building. It also provided for the wind bracing to be placed in the exterior walls — the most efficient place. The exterior wall in this system would be load bearing and used to support the structure itself.
once it was pointed out that the box column center of the building is the primary load bearing structure of the building design you simply followed the fruit loop pattern of avoiding it, denying it, and the trying to shift the debate away from that which you cannot dispute.
This revolutionary construction system was a major change from the conventional system that used steel i-beams throughout the structure with non-structural exterior curtain walls. Prior to this time, curtain walls were used primarily to keep the elements out and were non-load bearing. All wind loads were transferred through the floor membrane and supported by the core of the structure. This new hollow tube system design resulted in a light and economical structure using only half the amount of steel required in a conventional building. It also provided for the wind bracing to be placed in the exterior walls — the most efficient place. The exterior wall in this system would be load bearing and used to support the structure itself.
NEWSLETTER #69C February 23, 2005 September 11, 2001 Revisited. ACT III, ADDENDUM 1 This first missive was sent in by reader Dennis: ... www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html - 24k - Cached -
Firefighters were murdered on 911. Their stories stuffed away, denounced.
They heard bombs, they know it was a demolition, they know 'heat from fire' did not melt or degrade the steel columns.
These reports prove there was not sufficient fire or heat to make the towers collapse with symmetrical precision.
#209. To: war, Original_Intent, Wudidiz, FormerLurker (#200)
A localized fire
The video above features a compendium of clips from Loose Change and Alex Jones' Martial Law which include voluminous evidence of bombs inside the twin towers - both eyewitness testimony and physical evidence.
According to the Journal of Australian Fire Investigators, kerosene ignites at around 444°F. The temperature that the fire will eventually reach depends on both the combustion rate (based on O2) and the rate at which heat can be disbursed in the given scenario. Again, any firefighter can explain from experience and training that the black, sooty smoke (like that found on 9/11 at the WTC towers) were O2 deprived. Again, please contact professionals to verify this if you wish. In an oxygen deprived environment, higher temperatures cannot be reached. You can test this yourself by comparing a match in the open vs. a match in a bottle with a very small hole.
PHYSICAL CONSTANTS FOR INVESTIGATORS. by Tony Cafe. Reproduced from "Firepiont" magazine - Journal of Australian Fire Investigators. ... www.tcforensic.com.au/docs/article10.html - 69k - Cached
Paper and Wood are elements of a Class Alpha Fire and do not, even under ideal laboratory conditions, get hot enough to melt steel and there was insufficient quantities to even soften the steel as the steel girder framework acts like a heat sink dispersing the head throughout the structure and thus keeping the temperature down below the critical points.
A localized fire cannot cause a uniform symmetrical simultaneous collapse. The normal failure pattern in a catastrophic structural failure is for there to be a point of greatest weakness. The failure occurs at the weak point first which results in an ASYMMETRICAL failure with the structure moving toward the point of failure. It does not occur simultaneously in 360 degrees causing a uniform symmetrical failure. The uniform symmetrical failure is itself evidence of controlled demolition.
According to the Journal of Australian Fire Investigators, kerosene ignites at around 444°F. .....In an oxygen deprived environment, higher temperatures cannot be reached.
SPANISH SKYSCRAPER FIRE RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT 9/11 COLLAPSES
By Christopher Bollyn American Free Press
The fact that a Spanish skyscraper is still standing after an intense fire consumed the steel and concrete tower for 24 hours provides real world evidence that fire alone does not cause high-rise towers to collapse.
As an intense fire consumed the 32-story Windsor Building in Madrid's business district, the press reports all began with the words "fear of collapse." After 24 hours, however, the tower, which was a similar construction to the twin towers of the World Trade Center, remained standing.
The fact that an extremely severe fire did not cause the Spanish steel and concrete tower to collapse raises serious questions about the events of 9/11 and how they have been explained. Why did the Windsor Building remain standing when similar towers in New York City collapsed completely after being affected by much less intense fires burning for considerably shorter periods of time?
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) sponsored engineers to conduct the World Trade Center Building Performance Study (BPS) to examine how the buildings of the WTC responded to the airplane crashes and fires that allegedly caused the collapses of the twin towers and WTC 7, a 47-story office building on the next block.
"Prior to September 11, 2001, there was little, if any, record of fire-induced collapse of large fire-protected steel buildings," the BPS says in the chapter about the mysterious collapse of WTC 7, the third tower to collapse on 9/11. WTC 7 was not hit by aircraft or large pieces of debris and had only sporadic fires. At about 5:25 p.m., WTC 7, owned by Larry Silverstein, collapsed in what appeared to be a controlled demolition.
It would be more accurate to say that no steel framed high-rise, like WTC 7, has ever collapsed due to fire. The fact that the Windsor Building is still standing is proof that fire alone does not cause properly constructed steel and concrete towers to collapse.
Dr. W. Gene Corley, Senior Vice President of Construction Technology Laboratories (CTL) of Skokie, Ill., was team leader of the engineers who wrote the BPS.
CTL is a subsidiary of the Portland Cement Association and "provides structural and architectural engineering, testing, and materials technology services throughout the U.S. and internationally." According to its website, "CTL’s expertise extends beyond cement and concrete, encompassing virtually all structural systems and construction materials."
WACO, OKLAHOMA CITY, AND WTC
Corley served as expert adviser during the government's investigation of the 1993 fatal fire at the Branch Davidian complex in Waco, Texas. In 1995, Corley led a Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT) investigation of the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. In September 2001, once again, Corley was selected to head the team to study building performance after the attack on New York’s World Trade Center.
In the executive summary of the WTC study, Corley wrote that secondary fires caused the twin towers to collapse:
"The heat produced by this burning jet fuel does not by itself appear to have been sufficient to initiate the structural collapses. However, as the burning jet fuel spread across several floors of the buildings, it ignited much of the buildings' contents, causing simultaneous fires across several floors of both buildings," Corley wrote. "Over a period of many minutes, this heat induced additional stresses into the damaged structural frames while simultaneously softening and weakening these frames. This additional loading and the resulting damage were sufficient to induce the collapse of both structures."
In the section that deals with the collapse of the twin towers, the BPS says: "Because the aircraft impacts into the two buildings are not believed to have been sufficient to cause collapse without the ensuing fires, the obvious question is whether the fires alone, without the damage from the aircraft impact, would have been sufficient to cause such a collapse…it is impossible, without extensive modeling and other analysis, to make a credible prediction of how the buildings would have responded to an extremely severe fire in a situation where there was no prior structural damage."
The Windsor Building fire in Madrid provides an excellent real-world model to show how the twin towers should have responded to "an extremely severe fire" alone. The Windsor Building has central support columns in its core section, which is similar to the construction of the twin towers. This central core is what supported the gravity load of the towers.
In the Windsor Building fire, the fire is thought to have started on the 21st floor late on Saturday night, Feb. 12. The upper floors were consumed by intense fire for at least 18 hours. The fire moved down the building and burned the entire structure. The fire is reported to have burned temperatures of at 800 degrees Celsius, or nearly 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit.
There was a partial collapse of parts of the top 10 floors as the trusses, which went from the core columns to the outside walls, appear to have failed. It is important to note, however, that the lower floors did not collapse and the core section is still standing with a construction crane on the roof.
The complete failure of the 47-central support columns in the twin towers of the WTC is one of the key outstanding questions about what caused their collapses. It would be expected that they should have remained standing even if some of the floor trusses failed. There is no explanation for what caused the huge box columns to fail.
Two of the contractors who removed the rubble told AFP that they had found molten steel in the 7th basement level when they reached the bedrock where the columns were based. There is no explanation for what caused such intense residual heat to be found at the base of the twin towers, although some experts have pointed to powerful explosives.
By press time, Dr. Corley had not responded to questions about the BPS findings and the questions raised by the Windsor Building fire. Corley's assistant told AFP that he had just gone to the airport and would not be returning to the office until Feb. 28.
The Windsor Building was built from 1973-1979 in an area of Madrid where commercial property was developed on land owned by Rio Tinto, the international mining giant. This is thought to be the reason why the Windsor Building carries the name of the British royal family. The WTC towers were completed in the early 1970's.
The Windsor Building housed the offices of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, a multinational financial services company, which occupied 20 floors of the tower.
The area where the Windsor Building stands is a mixed residential and commercial area known as the AZCA zone. Dubbed 'Madrid's Manhattan', AZCA contains a cluster of modern skyscrapers. The tallest one is the Torre Picasso, a 516-foot tower built in 1989. The Picasso Tower was designed by Minoru Yamasaki, who also designed the twin towers of the WTC. Unión de Explosivos Río Tinto, S.A., owns the land where the tower stands.
Finis
The Windsor Building (Edificio Windsor) in Madrid, Spain burned "like a torch" for more than 18 hours from Saturday night, Feb. 12. After burning in an uncontrolled inferno the tower's core columns remain standing with a huge construction crane on top of the roof. This evidence supports the fact that prior to 9/11 NO steel-framed high- rise had ever collapsed due to fire. On 9/11 the 47-story WTC 7, owned by Larry Silverstein, collapsed at 5:25 p.m. There is no explanation for why the WTC 7 collapsed except for the fact that Silverstein told PBS that the decision was made to "pull it" and "we watched it come down."
See also:
The Collapse of WTC 1: Madrid Exposes a Fundamental Flaw The 9/11 WTC Collapses: An Audio-Video Analysis
THE JET fuel fires in the World Trade Center towers did not bring down those two buildings. Indeed, the fuel burned up in minutes. Why, then, did the towers and their 44-story neighbor, WTC-7, which was not struck by a plane, collapse? It's a question that bears generally on fire safety, the safety of building occupants and firefighters and the vulnerability of our buildings to terror by fire.
I expected the National Response Team of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms would participate in an investigation that I surely thought would follow the Sept. 11 attacks. The ATF has the authority to investigate arson involving interstate commerce. Certainly, these horrendous attacks should be construed as arson. I later learned that the ATF was told it would not be needed.
I expected the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to head the investigations. It's noted for its thoroughness, objectivity and know-how with respect to large-scale disasters. But it was relegated to flight issues dealing with the two hijacked aircraft and the aircraft debris. The buildings were not to be within the scope of their investigation.
There is an ad hoc investigative group, which is sponsored by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the American Society of Civil Engineers. But it does not have the full resources that might be made available, nor does it control the site.
I became increasingly concerned the more I learned about the investigative process, or lack of one. The site teams at the towers were focused on rescue, retrieval and cleanup, not investigation. The structural steel pieces, coded with chalk and stamped numbers to indicate their building location, were being sold as scrap metal.
The evidence needed to identify the cause of the collapse and intensity of the fire was being lost. Had the NTSB or ATF been involved, the site would have been secured, evidence documented and protected. Remember how the pieces of TWA Flight 800 were brought up from the ocean bottom off Long Island and restored to preserve structural evidence essential to identifying the cause of the 1996 crash?
WTC family survivors headed by Sally Regenhard last month urged New York City and federal authorities to launch a formal investigation into the collapse of the towers. As Ms. Regenhard said, her son did not die in a fire because of a collapsed building.
High-rise buildings are required to survive the impact of a modern commercial aircraft. Why shouldn't that include survival from the fire that would erupt? Building codes require that the structural elements of high-rise building withstand a three-hour test in a furnace. Why did the buildings collapse in less time? Was this terrorist attack an isolated event that had no bearing on high-rise vulnerability or on the consequences of fire in general?
The scrapping of steel debris should stop immediately, and all of it that has been sold should be impounded. The site should be controlled to conform to standard investigation practices. All records, video recordings and information about those killed and injured should be secured for analysis.
We can learn a great deal from this catastrophe. Many died because they did not expect buildings to collapse. Firefighters should not be the guinea pigs for determining the structural dynamics of buildings caught in flames. The potential for a building's collapse should be known before it happens. Fire safety needs to be incorporated into the normal design process of buildings.
The federal government has a role in developing the needed technology for fire safety. If there ever was a role for government that transcends political ideologies, this is one.
At least let's start with a formal investigation of the WTC collapse.
By James Quintiere Originally published January 3, 2002
James Quintiere is the John L. Bryan Professor of Fire Protection Engineering at the University of Maryland, College Park. . E-Mail Address: dgann@jhsph.edu
James G. Quintiere ...earned a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering in 1970. He has more than 25 years experience in fire research and its applications, is a professor in the Department of Fire Protection Engineering at the University of Maryland. Professor Quintiere has conducted research in the study of fire growth in structures and on materials, has developed test methods for ignition and flames spread, studied smoke movement in full-scale and scale model systems, and has developed theoretical solutions and simulation models for fire behavior and material response to fire. He has more than 100 publications in the field, and is currently Chairman of the International Association for Fire Safety Science (the world organization for fire research and its applications). In addition to his research, he has helped to analyze a number of fire disasters including the Dupont Plaza fire and the more recent Branch Davidian Fire near Waco, Texas.
... www.911truth.org, so long as the full source URL (">http://www.911truth. org/article.php?story=20050523112738404 in this case) is posted with the article. ... www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050523112738404 - 47k - Jan 23, 2007 - Cached -
Where have I promoted thwe idea that jet fule caused the collapse? IN point of fact, no authorative source, private or public, has said that jet fuel caused the collapse.
The NIST report was far more comprehensive than the FEMA report. It would not be unusual for initial findings to eventually be contradicted by further research.
- Most of the fuel burned up in the initial impact in the cases of both towers, and also the Pentagon. This was made evident from the large balls of fire visible in the various videos taken that morning. In order to understand this, one must imagine when a gas can explodes. If anyone has ever exploded a gas can, one knows that while there is some residual fire after the initial explosion, the vast majority of the fuel is ignited instantly and cannot burn for more than a few seconds. Likewise, when the planes hit the towers and the Pentagon, most of the fuel burned up withing a few seconds. The impacts would have instantly punctured the fuel containers in the wings, causing much of the fuel to splatter and ignite in a loose form. What little fuel was left did cause fires inside the buildings, as was evident by the smoke, but one must also take into account the amount of smoke....
- Over the course of the hour or so that each building burned, it was clear by video evidence that the smoke coming from each building was not increasing, but was in fact decreasing quickly. Any firefighter can attest to this being a clear indicator that the fire is dying down, and that it's usually on it's way out. Please feel free to contact your local fire department to verify this. To be clear, the fires going out means that the high temperature would not have been reinforced by a continuing blaze; the temperature would have begun dropping quickly.
On the other hand, you want me to ignore what you have ignored which are the facts of a) the impact of the planes....b) the explosion of the planes in a confined area and c) the subsequent fires caused by the explosion...
In discussing my second 9/11 book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, I have often said, only half in jest, that a better title might have been "a 571-page lie." (Actually, I was saying "a 567-page lie," because I was forgetting to count the four pages of the Preface.) In making this statement, one of my points has been that the entire Report is constructed in support of one big lie: that the official story about 9/11 is true.
Another point, however, is that in the process of telling this overall lie, The 9/11 Commission Report tells many lies about particular issues. This point is implied by my critique's subtitle, "Omissions and Distortions." It might be thought, to be sure, that of the two types of problems signaled by those two terms, only those designated "distortions" can be considered lies.
It is better, however, to understand the two terms as referring to two types of lies: implicit and explicit. We have an explicit lie when the Report claims that the core of each of the Twin Towers consisted of a hollow steel shaft or when it claims that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down order until after 10:10 that morning. But we have an implicit lie when the Commission, in its discussion of the 19 alleged suicide hijackers, omits the fact that at least six of them have credibly been reported to be still alive, or when it fails to mention the fact that Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed. Such omissions are implicit lies partly because they show that the Commission did not honor its stated intention "to provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11." They are also lies insofar as the Commission could avoid telling an explicit lie about the issue in question only by not mentioning it, which, I believe, was the case in at least most instances.
Given these two types of lies, it might be wondered how many lies are contained in The 9/11 Commission Report. I do not know. But, deciding to see how many lies I had discussed in my book, I found that I had identified over 100 of them. Once I had made the list, it occurred to me that others might find this summary helpful. Hence this article.
One caveat: Although in some of the cases it is obvious that the Commission has lied, in other cases I would say, as I make clear in the book, that it appears that the Commission has lied. However, in the interests of simply giving a brief listing of claims that I consider to be lies, I will ignore this distinction between obvious and probable lies, leaving it to readers, if they wish, to look up the discussion in The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. For ease in doing this, I have parenthetically indicated the pages of the book on which the various issues are discussed.
Given this clarification, I now list the omissions and claims of The 9/11 Commission Report that I, in my critique of that report, portrayed as lies:
1. The omission of evidence that at least six of the alleged hijackers---including Waleed al-Shehri, said by the Commission probably to have stabbed a flight attendant on Flight 11 before it crashed into the North Tower of the WTC---are still alive (19-20).
2. The omission of evidence about Mohamed Atta---such as his reported fondness for alcohol, pork, and lap dances---that is in tension with the Commission's claim that he had become fanatically religious (20-21).
3. The obfuscation of the evidence that Hani Hanjour was too poor a pilot to have flown an airliner into the Pentagon (21-22).
4. The omission of the fact that the publicly released flight manifests contain no Arab names (23).
5. The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse (25).
6. The omission of the fact that the fires in the Twin Towers were not very big, very hot, or very long-lasting compared with fires in several steel-frame buildings that did not collapse (25-26).
7. The omission of the fact that, given the hypothesis that the collapses were caused by fire, the South Tower, which was struck later than the North Tower and also had smaller fires, should not have collapsed first (26).
8. The omission of the fact that WTC 7 (which was not hit by an airplane and which had only small, localized fires) also collapsed---an occurrence that FEMA admitted it could not explain (26).
9. The omission of the fact that the collapse of the Twin Towers (like that of Building 7) exemplified at least 10 features suggestive of controlled demolition (26-27).
10. The claim that the core of each of the Twin Towers was "a hollow steel shaft"---a claim that denied the existence of the 47 massive steel columns that in reality constituted the core of each tower and that, given the "pancake theory" of the collapses, should have still been sticking up many hundreds of feet in the air (27-28).
11. The omission of Larry Silverstein's statement that he and the fire department commander decided to "pull" Building 7 (28).
12. The omission of the fact that the steel from the WTC buildings was quickly removed from the crime scene and shipped overseas before it could be analyzed for evidence of explosives (30).
13. The omission of the fact that because Building 7 had been evacuated before it collapsed, the official reason for the rapid removal of the steel---that some people might still be alive in the rubble under the steel---made no sense in this case (30).
14. The omission of Mayor Giuliani's statement that he had received word that the World Trade Center was going to collapse (30-31).
15. The omission of the fact that President Bush's brother Marvin and his cousin Wirt Walker III were both principals in the company in charge of security for the WTC (31-32).
16. The omission of the fact that the west wing of the Pentagon would have been the least likely spot to be targeted by al-Qaeda terrorists, for several reasons (33-34).
17. The omission of any discussion of whether the damage done to the Pentagon was consistent with the impact of a Boeing 757 going several hundred miles per hour (34).
18. The omission of the fact that there are photos showing that the west wing's façade did not collapse until 30 minutes after the strike and also that the entrance hole appears too small for a Boeing 757 to have entered (34).
19. The omission of all testimony that has been used to cast doubt on whether remains of a Boeing 757 were visible either inside or outside the Pentagon (34-36).
20. The omission of any discussion of whether the Pentagon has a anti-missile defense system that would have brought down a commercial airliner---even though the Commission suggested that the al-Qaeda terrorists did not attack a nuclear power plant because they assumed that it would be thus defended (36).
21. The omission of the fact that pictures from various security cameras---including the camera at the gas station across from the Pentagon, the film from which was reportedly confiscated by the FBI immediately after the strike---could presumably answer the question of what really hit the Pentagon (37-38).
22. The omission of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's reference to "the missile [used] to damage [the Pentagon]" (39).
23. The apparent endorsement of a wholly unsatisfactory answer to the question of why the Secret Service agents allowed President Bush to remain at the Sarasota school at a time when, given the official story, they should have assumed that a hijacked airliner might be about to crash into the school (41-44).
24. The failure to explore why the Secret Service did not summon fighter jets to provide air cover for Air Force One (43-46).
25. The claims that when the presidential party arrived at the school, no one in the party knew that several planes had been hijacked (47-48).
26. The omission of the report that Attorney General Ashcroft was warned to stop using commercial airlines prior to 9/11 (50).
27. The omission of David Schippers' claim that he had, on the basis of information provided by FBI agents about upcoming attacks in lower Manhattan, tried unsuccessfully to convey this information to Attorney General Ashcroft during the six weeks prior to 9/11 (51).
28. The omission of any mention of the FBI agents who reportedly claimed to have known the targets and dates of the attacks well in advance (51-52).
29. The claim, by means of a circular, question-begging rebuttal, that the unusual purchases of put options prior to 9/11 did not imply advance knowledge of the attacks on the part of the buyers (52-57).
30. The omission of reports that both Mayor Willie Brown and some Pentagon officials received warnings about flying on 9/11 (57).
31. The omission of the report that Osama bin Laden, who already was America's "most wanted" criminal, was treated in July 2001 by an American doctor in the American Hospital in Dubai and visited by the local CIA agent (59).
32. The omission of news stories suggesting that after 9/11 the US military in Afghanistan deliberately allowed Osama bin Laden to escape (60).
33. The omission of reports, including the report of a visit to Osama bin Laden at the hospital in Dubai by the head of Saudi intelligence, that were in tension with the official portrayal of Osama as disowned by his family and his country (60-61).
34. The omission of Gerald Posner's account of Abu Zubaydah's testimony, according to which three members of the Saudi royal family---all of whom later died mysteriously within an eight-day period---were funding al-Qaeda and had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks (61-65).
35. The Commission's denial that it found any evidence of Saudi funding of al-Qaeda (65-68).
36. The Commission's denial in particular that it found any evidence that money from Prince Bandar's wife, Princess Haifa, went to al-Qaeda operatives (69-70).
37. The denial, by means of simply ignoring the distinction between private and commercial flights, that the private flight carrying Saudis from Tampa to Lexington on September 13 violated the rules for US airspace in effect at the time (71-76).
38. The denial that any Saudis were allowed to leave the United States shortly after 9/11 without being adequately investigated (76-82).
39. The omission of evidence that Prince Bandar obtained special permission from the White House for the Saudi flights (82-86).
40. The omission of Coleen Rowley's claim that some officials at FBI headquarters did see the memo from Phoenix agent Kenneth Williams (89-90).
41. The omission of Chicago FBI agent Robert Wright's charge that FBI headquarters closed his case on a terrorist cell, then used intimidation to prevent him from publishing a book reporting his experiences (91).
42. The omission of evidence that FBI headquarters sabotaged the attempt by Coleen Rowley and other Minneapolis agents to obtain a warrant to search Zacarias Moussaoui's computer (91-94).
43. The omission of the 3.5 hours of testimony to the Commission by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds—-testimony that, according to her later public letter to Chairman Kean, revealed serious 9/11-related cover-ups by officials at FBI headquarters (94-101).
44. The omission of the fact that General Mahmoud Ahmad, the head of Pakistan's intelligence agency (the ISI), was in Washington the week prior to 9/11, meeting with CIA chief George Tenet and other US officials (103-04).
45. The omission of evidence that ISI chief Ahmad had ordered $100,000 to be sent to Mohamed Atta prior to 9/11 (104-07).
46. The Commission's claim that it found no evidence that any foreign government, including Pakistan, had provided funding for the al-Qaeda operatives (106).
47. The omission of the report that the Bush administration pressured Pakistan to dismiss Ahmad as ISI chief after the appearance of the story that he had ordered ISI money sent to Atta (107-09).
48. The omission of evidence that the ISI (and not merely al-Qaeda) was behind the assassination of Ahmad Shah Masood (the leader of Afghanistan's Northern Alliance), which occurred just after the week-long meeting between the heads of the CIA and the ISI (110-112).
49. The omission of evidence of ISI involvement in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Reporter Daniel Pearl (113).
50. The omission of Gerald Posner's report that Abu Zubaydah claimed that a Pakistani military officer, Mushaf Ali Mir, was closely connected to both the ISI and al-Qaeda and had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks (114).
51. The omission of the 1999 prediction by ISI agent Rajaa Gulum Abbas that the Twin Towers would be "coming down" (114).
52. The omission of the fact that President Bush and other members of his administration repeatedly spoke of the 9/11 attacks as "opportunities" (116-17).
53. The omission of the fact that The Project for the New American Century, many members of which became key figures in the Bush administration, published a document in 2000 saying that "a new Pearl Harbor" would aid its goal of obtaining funding for a rapid technological transformation of the US military (117-18).
54. The omission of the fact that Donald Rumsfeld, who as head of the commission on the US Space Command had recommended increased funding for it, used the attacks of 9/11 on that very evening to secure such funding (119-22).
55. The failure to mention the fact that three of the men who presided over the failure to prevent the 9/11 attacks—-Secretary Rumsfeld, General Richard Myers, and General Ralph Eberhart---were also three of the strongest advocates for the US Space Command (122).
56. The omission of the fact that Unocal had declared that the Taliban could not provide adequate security for it to go ahead with its oil-and-gas pipeline from the Caspian region through Afghanistan and Pakistan (122-25).
57. The omission of the report that at a meeting in July 2001, US representatives said that because the Taliban refused to agree to a US proposal that would allow the pipeline project to go forward, a war against them would begin by October (125-26).
58. The omission of the fact that Zbigniew Brzezinski in his 1997 book had said that for the United States to maintain global primacy, it needed to gain control of Central Asia, with its vast petroleum reserves, and that a new Pearl Harbor would be helpful in getting the US public to support this imperial effort (127-28).
59. The omission of evidence that some key members of the Bush administration, including Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz, had been agitating for a war with Iraq for many years (129-33).
60. The omission of notes of Rumsfeld's conversations on 9/11 showing that he was determined to use the attacks as a pretext for a war with Iraq (131-32).
61. The omission of the statement by the Project for the New American Century that "the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" (133-34).
62. The claim that FAA protocol on 9/11 required the time-consuming process of going through several steps in the chain of command--even though the Report cites evidence to the contrary (158).
63. The claim that in those days there were only two air force bases in NORAD's Northeast sector that kept fighters on alert and that, in particular, there were no fighters on alert at either McGuire or Andrews (159-162).
64. The omission of evidence that Andrews Air Force Base did keep several fighters on alert at all times (162-64).
65. The acceptance of the twofold claim that Colonel Marr of NEADS had to telephone a superior to get permission to have fighters scrambled from Otis and that this call required eight minutes (165-66).
66. The endorsement of the claim that the loss of an airplane's transponder signal makes it virtually impossible for the US military's radar to track that plane (166-67).
67. The claim that the Payne Stewart interception did not show NORAD's response time to Flight 11 to be extraordinarily slow (167-69).
68. The claim that the Otis fighters were not airborne until seven minutes after they received the scramble order because they did not know where to go (174-75).
69. The claim that the US military did not know about the hijacking of Flight 175 until 9:03, when it was crashing into the South Tower (181-82).
70. The omission of any explanation of (a) why NORAD's earlier report, according to which the FAA had notified the military about the hijacking of Flight 175 at 8:43, was now to be considered false and (b) how this report, if it was false, could have been published and then left uncorrected for almost three years (182).
71. The claim that the FAA did not set up a teleconference until 9:20 that morning (183).
72. The omission of the fact that a memo by Laura Brown of the FAA says that its teleconference was established at about 8:50 and that it included discussion of Flight 175's hijacking (183-84, 186).
73. The claim that the NMCC teleconference did not begin until 9:29 (186-88).
74. The omission, in the Commission's claim that Flight 77 did not deviate from its course until 8:54, of the fact that earlier reports had said 8:46 (189-90).
75. The failure to mention that the report that a large jet had crashed in Kentucky, at about the time Flight 77 disappeared from FAA radar, was taken seriously enough by the heads of the FAA and the FBI's counterterrorism unit to be relayed to the White House (190).
76. The claim that Flight 77 flew almost 40 minutes through American airspace towards Washington without being detected by the military's radar (191-92).
77. The failure to explain, if NORAD's earlier report that it was notified about Flight 77 at 9:24 was "incorrect," how this erroneous report could have arisen, i.e., whether NORAD officials had been lying or simply confused for almost three years (192-93).
78. The claim that the Langley fighter jets, which NORAD had previously said were scrambled to intercept Flight 77, were actually scrambled in response to an erroneous report from an (unidentified) FAA controller at 9:21 that Flight 11 was still up and was headed towards Washington (193-99).
79. The claim that the military did not hear from the FAA about the probable hijacking of Flight 77 before the Pentagon was struck (204-12).
80. The claim that Jane Garvey did not join Richard Clarke's videoconference until 9:40, after the Pentagon was struck (210).
81. The claim that none of the teleconferences succeeded in coordinating the FAA and military responses to the hijackings because "none of [them] included the right officials from both the FAA and the Defense Department"---although Richard Clarke says that his videoconference included FAA head Jane Garvey as well as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers, the acting chair of the joint chiefs of staff (211).
82. The Commission's claim that it did not know who from the Defense Department participated in Clarke's videoconference---although Clarke's book said that it was Donald Rumsfeld and General Myers (211-212).
83. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that he was on Capitol Hill during the attacks, without mentioning Richard Clarke's contradictory account, according to which Myers was in the Pentagon participating in Clarke's videoconference (213-17).
84. The failure to mention the contradiction between Clarke's account of Rumsfeld's whereabouts that morning and Rumsfeld's own accounts (217-19).
85. The omission of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta's testimony, given to the Commission itself, that Vice-President Cheney and others in the underground shelter were aware by 9:26 that an aircraft was approaching the Pentagon (220).
86. The claim that Pentagon officials did not know about an aircraft approaching Pentagon until 9:32, 9:34, or 9:36---in any case, only a few minutes before the building was hit (223).
87. The endorsement of two contradictory stories about the aircraft that hit the Pentagon---one in which it executed a 330-degree downward spiral (a "high-speed dive") and another in which there is no mention of this maneuver (222-23).
88. The claim that the fighter jets from Langley, which were allegedly scrambled to protect Washington from "Phantom Flight 11," were nowhere near Washington because they were mistakenly sent out to sea (223-24).
89. The omission of all the evidence suggesting that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77 (224-25).
90. The claim that the military was not notified by the FAA about Flight 93's hijacking until after it crashed (227-29, 232, 253).
91. The twofold claim that the NMCC did not monitor the FAA-initiated conference and then was unable to get the FAA connected to the NMCC-initiated teleconference (230-31).
92. The omission of the fact that the Secret Service is able to know everything that the FAA knows (233).
93. The omission of any inquiry into why the NMCC initiated its own teleconference if, as Laura Brown of the FAA has said, this is not standard protocol (234).
94. The omission of any exploration of why General Montague Winfield not only had a rookie (Captain Leidig) take over his role as the NMCC's Director of Operations but also left him in charge after it was clear that the Pentagon was facing an unprecedented crisis (235-36).
95. The claim that the FAA (falsely) notified the Secret Service between 10:10 and 10:15 that Flight 93 was still up and headed towards Washington (237).
96. The claim that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down authorization until after 10:10 (several minutes after Flight 93 had crashed) and that this authorization was not transmitted to the US military until 10:31 (237-41).
97. The omission of all the evidence indicating that Flight 93 was shot down by a military plane (238-39, 252-53).
98. The claim that Richard Clarke did not receive the requested shoot-down authorization until 10:25 (240).
99. The omission of Clarke's own testimony, which suggests that he received the shoot-down authorization by 9:50 (240).
100. The claim that Cheney did not reach the underground shelter (the PEOC [Presidential Emergency Operations Center]) until 9:58 (241-44).
101. The omission of multiple testimony, including that of Norman Mineta to the Commission itself, that Cheney was in the PEOC before 9:20 (241-44).
102. The claim that shoot-down authorization must be given by the president (245).
103. The omission of reports that Colonel Marr ordered a shoot-down of Flight 93 and that General Winfield indicated that he and others at the NMCC had expected a fighter jet to reach Flight 93 (252).
104. The omission of reports that there were two fighter jets in the air a few miles from NYC and three of them only 200 miles from Washington (251).
105. The omission of evidence that there were at least six bases with fighters on alert in the northeastern part of the United States (257-58).
106. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that NORAD had defined its mission in terms of defending only against threats from abroad (258-62).
107. The endorsement of General Myers' claim that NORAD had not recognized the possibility that terrorists might use hijacked airliners as missiles (262-63).
108. The failure to highlight the significance of evidence presented in the Report itself, and to mention other evidence, showing that NORAD had indeed recognized the threat that hijacked airliners might be used as missiles (264-67).
109. The failure to probe the issue of how the "war games" scheduled for that day were related to the military's failure to intercept the hijacked airliners (268-69).
110. The failure to discuss the possible relevance of Operation Northwoods to the attacks of 9/11 (269-71).
111. The claim---made in explaining why the military did not get information about the hijackings in time to intercept them---that FAA personnel inexplicably failed to follow standard procedures some 16 times (155-56, 157, 179, 180, 181, 190, 191, 193, 194, 200, 202-03, 227, 237, 272-75).
112. The failure to point out that the Commission's claimed "independence" was fatally compromised by the fact that its executive director, Philip Zelikow, was virtually a member of the Bush administration (7-9, 11-12, 282-84).
113. The failure to point out that the White House first sought to prevent the creation of a 9/11 Commission, then placed many obstacles in its path, including giving it extremely meager funding (283-85).
114. The failure to point out that the Commission's chairman, most of the other commissioners, and at least half of the staff had serious conflicts of interest (285-90, 292-95).
115. The failure of the Commission, while bragging that it presented its final report "without dissent," to point out that this was probably possible only because Max Cleland, the commissioner who was most critical of the White House and swore that he would not be part of "looking at information only partially," had to resign in order to accept a position with the Export-Import Bank, and that the White House forwarded his nomination for this position only after he was becoming quite outspoken in his criticisms (290-291).
I will close by pointing out that I concluded my study of what I came to call "the Kean-Zelikow Report" by writing that it, "far from lessening my suspicions about official complicity, has served to confirm them. Why would the minds in charge of this final report engage in such deception if they were not trying to cover up very high crimes?" (291)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
The omission of the fact that the fires in the Twin Towers were not very big, very hot, or very long-lasting compared with fires in several steel-frame buildings that did not collapse
Nice little job of parsing there...a) the fires were substantial and b) again, the WTC was hollow tube construction and not steel framed.
It actually collaped to the north and east and took out a good snick of Fitterman Hall which stands about 30 yards from me and was damaged substantially on its southern face from 7's collapse. Looking west to east...
Because the 767s were traveling at high speeds, were somewhat larger than 707s and each carried about 80 tons of jet fuel, Robertson said, “the energy that was absorbed by the impact was not less than three- times, and probably as much as six-times greater than the impact we had considered.
The 707 flies faster than a 767, and being that they are roughly weigh about the same, the 707 would do more damage due to its higher kinetic energy.
BTW, those 767's were carrying only about 10,000 gallons of fuel, less than half their total capacity. 10,000 gallons works out to 31,000 kilograms or 31 metric tons, not 80 as you claim.
Get your facts straight boy.
The impact would be less than half of the design expectation, due to the fuel load and the velocity being less than a 707's.
"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
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
The WTC had a concrete and tapered steel beam [thick at pottom thin on top] core with elevator shafts in their midst and were not "solid", btw.
Do you even look at the images you post? The image indicates a reinforced steel core. Are you blind as well as being dumb?
Here's an image of the WTC under construction. Note that the steel core is considerably more massive than depicted in the image you posted.
"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
So do you finally admit that it was impossible for the tilted top of the tower as I had shown to have dropped straight down when it was already in the process of tumbling to its side?
And do you admit that it was impossible for the towers to have collapsed as fast as they did?
"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
"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
Do you see where I'm going with this? If the top of the tower tilted to its side then dropped straight down, the only explanation would be that the core was intact but bent and that the top of the tower slid down the core. So if the core was intact, where IS IT? It simply vanished, as if it wasn't even there.
There are some videos which show a "spire" like core structure reaching up to mid level of the tower, then simply vaporizing 20 seconds or so afterwards.
Hmmm. What do you make of that? Did you find any NIST data that speaks about that topic?
And BTW, if the top of the tower slid down the core, how could it have fallen at virtual free fall speed where there would have been tremendous friction involved slowing down its descent? In addition to the time required to overcome the resistance to the steel core, what about the time required to smash the steel and concrete of each of the 100 floors below it? It did all that in about a second, subtracting the time it would have taken for it to fall through thin air.
C'mon Mr. Wizard, give us some physics here.
"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
Generally speaking, blasters will explode the major support columns on the lower floors first and then a few upper stories. In a 20-story building, for example, the blasters might blow the columns on the first and second floor, as well as the 12th and 15th floors. In most cases, blowing the support structures on the lower floors is sufficient for collapsing the building, but loading columns on upper floors helps break the building material into smaller pieces as it falls. This makes for easier clean-up following the blast.
So for WTC7, it would be fairly easy to do this.
Also, in the link I provided, look at the image that shows where explosives are generally put to bring down a building. Maybe 9 different places, treating each building as a group of 9 different towers, would need explosives. Now, that seems extremely easy to get away with. Something the U.S. government is more than capable of planning and acting on.
A brief summary of some outstanding and unanswered points of fact surrounding the WTC collapses.
* The engineers who designed the building designed it to withstand impact by planes and fire. To be able to take multiple impacts from similarly sized aircraft as the 767--Like a window screen being poked with a pencil, it would do nothing to the integrity of the structure.
* Never before in history has a steel framed skyscraper been brought down from fire, yet on 9/11, by coincidence, three such buildings collapsed in under ten seconds each.
* Building 7, which was not structurally damaged by aircraft, came down in a manner that matches the signature demolition model, complete with triggering squibs (outward explosions of support structures preceding the falling mass), and falling into its footprint. Slow motion video footage highlights these features.
* Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC complex, admitted on a September 2002 PBS documentary, "America Rebuilds" that he and the NYFD decided to 'pull' WTC 7 on the day of the attack. The word 'pull' is industry jargon for taking a building down with explosives. Larry Silverstein, WTC 7, and the 9/11 Demolition
* Explosions and warnings to get back from WTC 7, "it is about to come down." WTC7 - Incriminating evidence Listen, five seconds in, you can clearly hear the BOMBS going off. "Did you hear that?", "Keep your eye on that building, that things coming down ....", "The building about to blow up ... move it back", "Alright guys .. ", "Move it back because the building is about to blow up ...", Firefighters: Explosion, Fireman: Bomb In The Building, We think there is going to be another explosion, Fireman: Boom, boom, boom
* How did the 9/11 Commission Official Report deal with the WTC7 collapse? They omitted it entirely. Not one mention of it.
* Towers 1 and 2 also fell in a manner consistent with demolition, and had numerous visible squibs preceding the falling mass. Bear in mind that a "tidy" and "safe" fall would not necessarily be the objective of individuals pulling off such a thing.
* Rate of speed of the fall is near that of free-fall, which contradicts the pancake model in which a delay must be expected due to conservation of momentum – one of the foundational Laws of Physics.
* The fine powder into which the building was converted during the collapse is consistent with the demolition model and its associated explosives. There would have been some pulverization in the pancake model, but not to the extent seen in this case.
* Molten steel in the wreckage, weeks after the collapse, is consistent with military-grade demolition charges, in which chemicals continue to react with the metal long after the initial implosion event. Molten Steel at WTC site weeks later, Thermite & The Case for Controlled Demolition
* NIST report 10/19/04: suggest that the steel was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 500F (250C), which is what one might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation. "most perimeter panels (157 of 160) saw no temperature above 250C". To soften steel for the purposes of forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1100C. Newer NIST report contradicts original findings. Google search: "saw no temperature above 250c" nist
* Numerous eyewitnesses described hearing multiple explosions and popping not associated with the planes hitting the buildings.
* WTC buildings 1,2 and 7 had undergone unannounced security evacuations in the days prior to Sept. 11. A concurrent power outage disabled security cameras. Explosives-sniffing dogs were called off as part of that evacuation procedure. Marvin Bush, brother to the President, was a principal in a security company, Securacom and now named Stratesec, for the WTC center, Dulles International Airport and United Airlines
* It would only take 10 men ten trips to place the necessary explosives to bring the towers down by demolition.
* The 911 Commission report says that there were no central support columns, which is a lie. The WTC had the most robust central support columns, 47 massive steel columns, in the world at the time it was built, and was designed to be centrally supported.
* Virtually all of the steel was quickly sold to scrap dealers, trucked away, and sent to Asia to be melted down. Thus the evidence was destroyed which could have shown whether explosives had been used to slice them, contrary to laws governing removal of items from a crime scene..
* The towers were basically condemned in 1989 because of Galvanic Corrosion between the outer wall parts having aluminum in them and not electrically insulated properly when built. The cost then to bring them down was $5.6 Billion dollars. Deposition on the problem, Google search: galvanic corrosion wtc 1989 It is only corrosion on the aluminum panels on the exterior of the building. It had nothing to do with any support of the buildings only the fascia of them. The buildings were primarily supported by the 47 central columns. They took those columns out in just a very few places and with the support gone the outer walls were crushed thus throwing them outwards in 30 and 60 foot chucks. If the outer walls gave way then just that part would have fallen leaving all the rest standing.
* Mark Bingham, a passenger on Flight 93, is supposed to have called his mother and said, 'Hi, Mom, this is Mark Bingham!' His mother confirmed it was his voice, but does anyone seriously believe that Mark Bingham would have used his last name in identifying himself to his mother? See When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing - Voice morphing technology
* The Northwoods Document irrefutably establishes our government WOULD openly conspire to not only provoke and allow an attack (to further an already established military agenda) ...they'd actually manufacture the entire event.
* Video of Norman Mineta stating before the 911 commission about Cheney in the bunker giving orders--stand down..
* There are over 80 Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government Critics of the 9/11 Commission Report and the official story. Additionally there are over 110 Scholars listed also.
Published on Tuesday, February 4, 2003 by the Prince George's Journal (Maryland)
Bush-Linked Company Handled Security for the WTC, Dulles and United
by Margie Burns
George W. Bush's brother was on the board of directors of a company providing electronic security for the World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport and United Airlines, according to public records. The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for years to the Bush family.
The security company, formerly named Securacom and now named Stratesec, is in Sterling, Va.. Its CEO, Barry McDaniel, said the company had a ``completion contract" to handle some of the security at the World Trade Center ``up to the day the buildings fell down."
It also had a three-year contract to maintain electronic security systems at Dulles Airport, according to a Dulles contracting official. Securacom/Stratesec also handled some security for United Airlines in the 1990s, according to McDaniel, but it had been completed before his arriving on the board in 1998.
McDaniel confirmed that the company has security contracts with the Department of Defense, including the U.S. Army, but did not detail the nature of the work, citing security concerns. It has an ongoing line with the General Services Administration - meaning that its bids for contracts are noncompetitive - and also did security work for the Los Alamos laboratory before 1998.
Marvin P. Bush, the president's youngest brother, was a director at Stratesec from 1993 to fiscal year 2000. But the White House has not publicly disclosed Bush connections in any of its responses to 9/11, nor has it mentioned that another Bush-linked business had done security work for the facilities attacked.
Marvin Bush joined Securacom when it was capitalized by the Kuwait-American Corporation, a private investment firm in D.C. that was the security company's major investor, sometimes holding a controlling interest. Marvin Bush has not responded to telephone calls and e-mails for comment.
KuwAm has been linked to the Bush family financially since the Gulf War. One of its principals and a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, Mishal Yousef Saud al Sabah, served on the board of Stratesec.
The managing director at KuwAm, Wirt D. Walker III, was also a principal at Stratesec, and Walker, Marvin Bush and al Sabah are listed in SEC filings as significant shareholders in both companies during that period.
Marvin Bush's last year on the board at Stratesec coincided with his first year on the board of HCC Insurance, formerly Houston Casualty Co., one of the insurance carriers for the WTC. He left the HCC board in November 2002.
But none of these connections has been looked at during the extensive investigations since 9/11. McDaniel says principals and other personnel at Stratesec have not been questioned or debriefed by the FBI or other investigators. Walker declined to answer the same question regarding KuwAm, referring to the public record.
Walker is also chairman and CEO of Aviation General, a Tulsa, Okla.-based aviation company with two subsidiaries. SEC filings also show al Sabah as a principal and shareholder in Aviation General, which was recently delisted by the Nasdaq. Stratesec was delisted by the American Stock Exchange in October 2002.
The suite in which Marvin Bush was annually re-elected, according to public records, is located in the Watergate in space leased to the Saudi government. The company now holds shareholder meetings in space leased by the Kuwaiti government there. The White House has not responded to various requests for comment.
Speaking of the Watergate, Riggs National Bank, where Saudi Princess Al-Faisal had her ``Saudi money trail" bank account, has as one of its executives Jonathan Bush, an uncle of the president. The public has not learned whether Riggs - which services 95 percent of Washington's foreign embassies - will be turning over records relating to Saudi finance.
Meanwhile, Bush has nominated William H. Donaldson to head the Securities and Exchange Commission. Donaldson, a longtime Bush family friend, was a Yale classmate of Jonathan Bush.
On the very day of the tragic space shuttle crash, the government appointed an independent investigative panel, and rightly so. Why didn't it do the same on Sept. 12, 2001?
Margie Burns, a teacher and writer, lives in Cheverly, Maryland.
Welcome to the "Missing Links" Website. As mastermind/creator of this site and the film "Missing Links", I, Mike Delaney want everyone to STEAL this movie and call it your own and get it out to everyone you know. This video was the sacrifice of people like myself who wanted the REAL truth about 9/11 to get out.
Thank you
Mike Delaney
Now you will discover the definitive truth about 9/11 and learn why even the most popular movies on the subject have failed to address the evidence exhaustively presented in this video. The facts will make it abundantly clear that the so-called 9/11 “Truth” movement has been infiltrated and is ultimately controlled by the same criminal group who masterminded the attacks. As they say, 'if you want to control the dissent you lead the dissent.' Utilizing evidence from the FBI, CIA, NSA, US Armed Forces Intelligence sectors, Foreign Intelligence organizations, local law enforcement agencies and independent investigators, Missing Links goes where no other 9/11 video has dared to.
war doesn't have answers that are logical, he has his heart felt beliefs. The government and media propaganda about 9/11 worked very well on most people.
the architects/engineers admitted that the 767 hits were outside of the parameters of their "707 scenario".
The architects who designed the World Trade Center designed it to withstand the direct impact and fuel fire of a commercial airline crash. Aaron Swirsky, one of the architects of the WTC described the collapse as "incredible" and "unbelievable." 1 Lee Robertson, the project's structural engineer said: "I designed it for a 707 to hit it. The Boeing 707 has a fuel capacity comparable to the 767." 2
A lead engineer who designed the World Trade Center Towers expressed shock that the towers collapsed after being hit by passenger jets.
"This building would have stood had a plane smashed into it," said Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the trade center's construction manager. "But 24,000 gallons of [burning] aviation fuel melted the steel.
"Nothing is designed or will be designed to withstand that kind of fire."
People look at a half-constructed building caught on fire in Foshan, south China's Guangdong province, Friday, Jan. 16, 2009. The fire on the 26-story office building lasted for four hours. Cause of the fire accident is under investigation. (AP Photo/Color China Photo)
[We KNOW just how well China makes about everything..............just check out all the recalls on the products they ship out of their country.....]
China's Tallest Building Catches Fire, Does Not Collapse
World Financial Center in Shanghai miraculously defies physics
Prison Planet | August 15, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson
Shanghai's World Financial Center, the tallest building in China upon completion, defied all known physics yesterday afternoon when it caught fire but did not collapse, a modern day miracle in light of the commonly accepted premise that since 9/11, all steel buildings that suffer limited fire damage implode within two hours.
Shanghai's World Financial Center, the tallest building in China upon completion, defied all known physics yesterday afternoon when it caught fire but did not collapse
WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 are the only steel-structure buildings ever to have collapsed (allegedly) as a result of fire. There are several cases of fires in other such buildings, none of which collapsed.
In May 1988 a fire at the Interstate Bank Building in Los Angeles destroyed four floors and damaged a fifth floor of the modern 62-story building. The fire burned for four hours. The building did not collapse. See www.iklimnet.com/hotelfires/interstatebank.html In February 1991 a fire gutted eight floors of the 38-story One Meridian Plaza building in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The fire burned for 18 hours. The building did not collapse. See www.sgh.com/expertise/haz...ing/meridian/meridian.htm
In October 2004 in Caracas, Venezuela, a fire in a 56-story office tower burned for more 17 hours and spread over 26 floors. Two floors collapsed, but the underlying floors did not, and the building remained standing. See www.cbsnews.com/stories/2...18/world/main649824.shtml In February 2005 there was another "towering inferno" in Taiwan. The fire burned for about an hour and a half, but the building never came close to collapsing. See www.itv.com/news/world_404914.html
caracas fire
Windsor Building burning Also in February 2005 the 32-story Windsor Building in Madrid, Spain, caught fire and burned for two days. The building was completely engulfed in flames at one point. Several top floors collapsed onto lower ones, yet the building remained standing. See news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4263667.stm
See also Christopher Bollyn's 9/11 and the Windsor Tower Fire.
Windsor Building still standing
It is not well-known that WTC1 itself survived a serious fire in 1975. It started on the 11th floor and spread to six other floors, burning for three hours. For more details see The World Trade Center Fires (Not So Hot eh?). How come WTC1 survived a 3-hour fire in 1975 but completely collapsed as the (alleged) result of a fire lasting less than two hours on 9/11?
In response to this question one reader wrote:
I would submit that none of the other buildings were hit by a heavy aircraft moving at 500 miles per hour, which sheared off many beams, support structures, etc. The shock to the tower must have been tremendous! Isn't this obvious?
It may be "obvious" that a heavy plane hitting a skyscraper would deliver a "tremendous" shock, but it doesn't follow that the building must therefore collapse. In 1945 the Empire State Building was hit by a B-25 bomber, but it was still standing last time I saw it. "Ah yes, but it was the impact plus the fires!" Well, when the B-25 hit the Empire State Building "its fuel tanks were reported to have exploded, engulfing the 79th floor in flames", as we read at Empire State Building Withstood Airplane Impact.
"Ah, but none of the buildings mentioned above were struck by a 390,000 pound aircraft traveling at 350+ m.p.h." Well, each of the Twin Towers was still standing 50 minutes after being hit, so it was not the impacts which caused them to collapse. "Ah, but the intense heat of the burning jet fuel!" Actually, according to NIST's chief WTC-investigator the jet fuel burnt itself out in less than ten minutes. Don't believe it? Read through Reply to Popular Mechanics re 9/11: Claim #6. Then go to the top and read it all. Then follow the links to other articles on this website showing that the official story is bogus. Then follow the links to the many other websites which demonstrate that 9/11 was an inside job. Too busy? Oh, well, then, if you don't care to know what really happened on 9/11 ...
What you have heard ever since 9/11 on network TV and in the mainstream media such as the New York Times and all the other corporate-controlled newspapers is simply the official story, repeated over and over, on the assumption that if a lie is repeated often enough then people will believe it. Especially if it is a big lie. The idea that elements of the US government were responsible for planning and carrying out acts which killed about 3000 people is so outrageous that most people (most Americans, at least) reject it reflexively. But it is precisely because it is so outrageous that the perps assumed that no-one except a few fringe thinkers would ever take it seriously, and that they would get away with this act of mass murder. What they didn't count on was that thousands of websites would minutely examine the evidence available (such evidence as was left, mainly photographic, after New York Mayor Giuliani ordered every scrap of physical evidence removed from the WTC site as quickly as possible, with nothing but a token forensic examination, and shipped overseas to be melted down in blast furnaces).
An examination of the evidence which remains leads inexorably to the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job, perpetrated by elements within the US government (probably going back before Bush came to power in 2001) in order to justify US military aggression against any country which stands in the way of its aim of global economic, financial and political domination. Maybe you think that the deaths of 100,000 Iraqis, the bombing of any country that the US chooses to bomb, thousands of deaths and injuries among US soldiers, and the contempt of all other countries for the US, are worth it to maintain US global domination; but what about the mass murder of around 3000 people, mostly US citizens, in New York City on 9/11? A small price to pay? This website presents much of the evidence that elements within the US government carried out this atrocity, and there are also many other websites which do so. If you can read then there is now no excuse to plead ignorance.
A copy of the entire Serendipity website is available on CD-ROM.
Shanghai's World Financial Center, the tallest building in China upon completion, defied all known physics yesterday afternoon when it caught fire but did not collapse
Windsor Building burning Also in February 2005 the 32-story Windsor Building in Madrid, Spain, caught fire and burned for two days. The building was completely engulfed in flames at one point. Several top floors collapsed onto lower ones, yet the building remained standing.
It collapsed from an out of control fire weakening one of the main support beams.
You believe that a 110 story building can fall to the earth at the same rate as it would if it fell through thin air, neglecting the fact that it had to crash through at least 80 stories of undamaged steel and concrete, and that 19 Arab hijackers that "hated us for our freedom", of whom at least 5 are still alive, commandeered four US airliners and flew precision attacks against this Nation, and evaded US air defences for over an hour?
the planes were just to hide and obfuscate what really caused the towers to collapse....
agreed.
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. "I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
It actually collaped to the north and east and took out a good snick of Fitterman Hall which stands about 30 yards from me and was damaged substantially on its southern face from 7's collapse.
It all but fell right into its footprint...you are talking about fractions rather than yards of difference between what "should have" happened as opposed to what actually happened.
1. If the World Trade Center (WTC) towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts by Boeing 707 aircraft, why did the impact of individual 767s cause so much damage?
2. Why did NIST not consider a “controlled demolition” hypothesis with matching computer modeling and explanation as it did for the “pancake theory” hypothesis? A key critique of NIST’s work lies in the complete lack of analysis supporting a “progressive collapse” after the point of collapse initiation and the lack of consideration given to a controlled demolition hypothesis.
3. How could the WTC towers have collapsed without a controlled demolition since no steel-frame, high-rise buildings have ever before or since been brought down due to fires? Temperatures due to fire don't get hot enough for buildings to collapse.
4. Weren't the puffs of smoke that were seen, as the collapse of each WTC tower starts, evidence of controlled demolition explosions?
5. Why were two distinct spikes—one for each tower—seen in seismic records before the towers collapsed? Isn't this indicative of an explosion occurring in each tower?
6. How could the WTC towers collapse in only 11 seconds (WTC 1) and 9 seconds (WTC 2)—speeds that approximate that of a ball dropped from similar height in a vacuum (with no air resistance)?
7a. How could the steel have melted if the fires in the WTC towers weren’t hot enough to do so? OR 7b. Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) certified the steel in the WTC towers to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours, how could fires have impacted the steel enough to bring down the WTC towers?
8. We know that the sprinkler systems were activated because survivors reported water in the stairwells. If the sprinklers were working, how could there be a 'raging inferno' in the WTC towers?
9. If thick black smoke is characteristic of an oxygen-starved, lower temperature, less intense fire, why was thick black smoke exiting the WTC towers when the fires inside were supposed to be extremely hot?
10. Why were people seen in the gaps left by the plane impacts if the heat from the fires behind them was so excessive?
11. Why do some photographs show a yellow stream of molten metal pouring down the side of WTC2 that NIST claims was aluminum from the crashed plane although aluminum burns with a white glow?
12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."
13. Why did the NIST investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the WTC towers?
14. Why is the NIST investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 (the 47-story office building that collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, hours after the towers) taking so long to complete? Is a controlled demolition hypothesis being considered to explain the collapse?
1. If the World Trade Center (WTC) towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts by Boeing 707 aircraft, why did the impact of individual 767s cause so much damage?
All good questions....let's start with the first one, War. What is .gov telling you to say about this one?
World Trade Center Seven collapsed on September 11, 2001, at 5:20 p.m. There were no known casualties due to this collapse. The performance of WTC 7 is of significant interest because it appears the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers. [On the contrary, it appears the collapse was due primarily due to a controlled demolition.] Prior to September 11, 2001, there was little, if any, record of fire-induced collapse of large fire-protected steel buildings. [Before September 11, no steel framed skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire.]
[On September 11, WTC 7 collapsed totally. It is suggested by the official report that this collapse was exclusively due to fire. No significant evidence is offered to back up this suggestion (after all it is only a suggestion). It should be emphasized that WTC 7 was neither hit by an aircraft nor by significant quantities of debris from the collapse of the twin towers. It is also widely claimed that WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed mainly due to fire. I emphasize, that before September 11, no steel framed skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire. However, on September 11, it is claimed that three steel framed skyscrapers collapsed mainly, or totally, due to fire.]
[As you can see from the above animated-gif, the collapse of WTC 7 certainly has the appearance of a controlled demolition. But, judge for yourself, download and watch the following short video clips and a larger version of the animated-gif:
A Video of the collapse of WTC 7.
Another video of the collapse of WTC 7.
And another video of the collapse of WTC 7.
And yet another video of the collapse of WTC 7.
A larger (3.3 MB) version of the above animated-gif. ]
So we have been presented with the following absurd story:
1. Power to the Twin Towers was wired from the substation in WTC 7 through two separate systems. The first provided power throughout each building; the second provided power only to the emergency systems. In the event of fire, power would only be provided to the emergency systems. This was to prevent arcing electric lines igniting new fires and to reduce the risk of firefighters being electrocuted. There were also six 1,200 kW emergency power generators located in the sixth basement (B-6) level of the towers, which provided a backup power supply. These also had normal and emergency subsystems.
2. Previous to the collapse of the South Tower, the power to the towers was switched to the emergency subsystem to provide power for communications equipment, elevators, emergency lighting in corridors and stairwells, and fire pumps and safety for firefighters. At this time power was still provided by the WTC 7 substation.
3. Con Ed reported that "the feeders supplying power to WTC 7 were de-energized at 9:59 a.m.". This was due to the South Tower collapse which occurred at the same time.
4. Unfortunately, even though the main power system for the towers was switched off and WTC 7 had been evacuated, a design flaw allowed generators (designed to supply backup power for the WTC complex) to start up and resume an unnecessary and unwanted power supply.
5. Unfortunately, debris from the collapse of the north tower (the closest tower) fell across the building known as World Trade Center Six, and then across Vesey Street, and then impacted WTC 7 which is (at closest) 355 feet away from the north tower.
6. Unfortunately, some of this debris penetrated the outer wall of WTC 7, smashed half way through the building, demolishing a concrete masonry wall (in the north half of the building) and then breached a fuel oil pipe that ran across the building just to the north of the masonry wall.
7. Unfortunately, though most of the falling debris was cold, it manages to start numerous fires in WTC 7.
8. Unfortunately, even with the outbreak of numerous fires in the building, no decision was made to turn off the generators now supplying electricity to WTC 7. Fortunately, for the firefighters, someone did make the decision not to fight and contain the fires while they were still small, but to wait until the fires were large and out of control. Otherwise, many firefighters may have been electrocuted while fighting the fires.
9. Unfortunately, the safety mechanism that should have shut down the fuel oil pumps (which were powered by electricity) upon the breaching of the fuel line, failed to work and fuel oil (diesel) was pumped from the Salomon Smith Barney tanks on the ground floor onto the 5th floor where it ignited. The pumps eventually emptied the tanks, pumping some 12,000 gallons in all.
10. Unfortunately, the sprinkler system of WTC 7 malfunctioned and did not extinguish the fires.
11. Unfortunately, the burning diesel heated trusses one and two to the point that they lost their structural integrity.
12. Unfortunately, this then (somehow) caused the whole building to collapse, even though before September 11, no steel framed skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire.
Feel free to wax eloquently about what a moron you are...believe me...it's entertaining...
War, I got to say, you're a fucking asshole.
I did respect your response on various postings, but on this, you're a piece of crap. It's beneath you, but since you've gone apeshit on Obamalamadigdong, I guess I can't expect anything more.
Such a shame.
Oh, hey Rotara, I forgot to include you! Go fuck yourself!
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. - Henry Louis Mencken
1. If the World Trade Center (WTC) towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts by Boeing 707 aircraft, why did the impact of individual 767s cause so much damage?
They didn't cause that much damage. The WTC towers took jet planes hitting it at their highest speed and only swayed about as much as it would on a windy day. The damage caused was mostly to the exterior. The central core columns would have sustained very little to no damage due to the exterior columns absorbing most of the blow and significantly slowing down any remaining debris of the plane.
Yea so? You're ignoring the designers scenario. The 707 would be flying at close to landing speed which is 115-120 knots. The 767's were flying 3 times that which results in a kinetic factor 7-10 times greater.
Some 707 V 767 facts:
707: Wingspan of 145ft, Length of 152ft, Height of 42ft.
767:Wingspan of 156ft, Length of 159ft, Height of 52ft.
BTW, those 767's were carrying only about 10,000 gallons of fuel
ONLY?!? Is it your point that 10,000 gallons of highly flammable liquid is not enough to act as a catalyst/accelerant?
not 80 as you claim
I did not make that claim. The guy who designed the WTC made that claim.
The impact would be less than half of the design expectation
So do you finally admit that it was impossible for the tilted top of the tower as I had shown to have dropped straight down when it was already in the process of tumbling to its side?
What the fuck are you babbling about other than you have no concept opf physics? Absent any greater and opposite force, It had no choice but to drop straight down once the center of gravity was horizontally established.
And do you admit that it was impossible for the towers to have collapsed as fast as they did?
I posted the graph that deteailed how quickly they collapsed which, in terms of the force of gravity acting upon a body so it is in freefall, it is much longet than you claim that they did.
Do you see where I'm going with this? If the top of the tower tilted to its side then dropped straight down, the only explanation would be that the core was intact but bent and that the top of the tower slid down the core. So if the core was intact, where IS IT? It simply vanished, as if it wasn't even there.
Dude...you are so fucking babbling. top trying to ***think*** and start using REALITY.wtc floor construction
This is what the floorstructure of the WTC looked like around the core:
As you can seee, there were elevators within the core. Furthermore, the core was reliant on the exterior support beams to relieve it of being the lone horizontal load bearing mechanism. Once that exterior had been breached and then the internal bracing compromised, there was no other outcome available but destruction.
The engineers who designed the building designed it to withstand impact by planes and fire. To be able to take multiple impacts from similarly sized aircraft as the 767--Like a window screen being poked with a pencil, it would do nothing to the integrity of the structure.
That's been shown to be false by me posting the words of the lead strutural enginner who said that it was built to withstand the impact of one 707 at landing speed with minimal fuel.
Never before in history has a steel framed skyscraper
The WTC is NOT steel framed.
Rate of speed of the fall is near that of free-fall,
ACtually, from a physics point of view given the effect of gravity over that height the differenc ein time is not "near" but quite distant.
The fine powder into which the building was converted during the collapse is consistent with the demolition model and its associated explosives. There would have been some pulverization in the pancake model, but not to the extent seen in this case.
FINE POWDER?!?
There were huge chunks of steel and office parts strewen all over.
The architects who designed the World Trade Center designed it to withstand the direct impact and fuel fire of a commercial airline crash. Aaron Swirsky, one of the architects of the WTC described the collapse as "incredible" and "unbelievable." 1 Lee Robertson, the project's structural engineer said: "I designed it for a 707 to hit it. The Boeing 707 has a fuel capacity comparable to the 767." 2
I posted what Leslie Robertson said about the 707 scenario:
The two towers were the first structures outside of the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airliner, the Boeing 707. It was assumed that the jetliner would be lost in the fog, seeking to land at JFK or at Newark. To the best of our knowledge, little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance. Indeed, at that time, no fireproofing systems were available to control the effects of such fires.
It all but fell right into its footprint...you are talking about fractions rather than yards of difference between what "should have" happened as opposed to what actually happened.
Uh no. Your own video shows the building favoring the east side as it collapses...
If the World Trade Center (WTC) towers were designed to withstand multiple impacts by Boeing 707
How many times do I have to answer this one?
Do you folks believe that if you post the same question with the same faulty premise over and over and over and over that The Premise Fairy will come and wave Moonbat Dust over it and make it true?
The central core columns would have sustained very little to no damage due to the exterior columns absorbing most of the blow and significantly slowing down any remaining debris of the plane.
You are claiming that when the planes hit @ 400+ and 500+ miles anbd exploded that no internal damage occurred? Can you explain to me how the explosion went from outside io inside without causing any damage?
BTW, whent he first plane hit, I was able to speak to my buddy who was a broker at Cantor in WTC 2 and he told me that he felt like his floor was "tipping over" right before his line went dead.
Bodies in WTC 7: Jennings Interview Demolishes Official Version
Kurt Nimmo Infowars June 23, 2008
It is obvious watching the BBC’s trailer of its "The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Third Tower," set to air on Sunday, 6 July, that "Auntie Beeb" will attempt to make it appear Building 7 at the WTC complex came down as a result of fire (see trailer below). In other words, it appears the BBC will push — and defend — the government explanation hastily cooked up after attention was focused on the mysterious collapse by researchers, a collapse diligently ignored by the 9/11 Commission in its final report, or that is to say its final whitewash.
The Barry Jennings interview with an introduction by Jason Bermas. The clip here will appear in Bermas’ upcoming documentary, Fabled Enemies.
The BBC interviewed Dylan Avery, writer and director of the documentary "Loose Change," and during the interview the BBC disputed Avery’s claim that there were dead bodies in the lobby of Building 7 as the result of an explosion prior to the collapse of either WTC buildings. In order to make his point, Dylan showed the BBC video footage of one Barry Jennings, the New York City Housing Authority worker who made the claim of dead bodies strewn in the rubble. The Jennings interview included here was to appear in Loose Change, but Mr. Jennings had reservations after receiving threatening phone calls. He was worried about losing his job and requested the interview not be included.
Jennings, and Mike Hess, New York’s corporation counsel and a good buddy of then mayor Rudolph Giuliani, went to the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) on the 23rd floor of WTC 7, but when they arrived found the office evacuated, a situation at odds with the whitewash report. "After the South Tower was hit [at 9:03], OEM senior leadership decided to remain in its ‘bunker’ and continue conducting operations, even though all civilians had been evacuated from 7 WTC," the report states (Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, pp. 305). The whitewash commission’s description runs counter to a report published in The London Independent on September 13, 2001, indicating that Jennings and Hess arrived at the OEM by the time the South Tower was hit, indicating the center was evacuated earlier than officially claimed.
The BBC trailer for "The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 — The Third Tower."
According to Hess, when they used the stairs — the elevator was inoperable — to go down to the eighth floor, “there was an explosion” and they were “trapped on the eighth floor with smoke, thick smoke, all around us, for about an hour and a half.” The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) claims the two men went down the stairs after 9:59, when the first collapse occurred, and were trapped around the time the second tower collapsed at 10:28, a claim at odds with the version published in the London Independent. "After the second plane hit they scrambled downstairs to the lobby, or what was left of it. ‘I looked around, the lobby was gone. It looked like hell,’ Mr Jennings said."
In the video here, Jennings says the lobby of WTC 7 was so destroyed he did not recognize it as such, it was "total ruins," and the fireman escorting him instructed Jennings and Hess not to look down because "we were stepping over [dead] people… and you know you can feel when you are stepping over people." Jennings’ story indicates, contrary to the official version of events, that a bomb or bombs had gone off in WTC 7, well before either WTC buildings collapsed (the south tower collapsed at 9:59 a.m. and the north tower followed at 10:28 a.m.). For the government and the corporate media, the Jennings narrative is problematic, to say the least.
As the BBC’s role is to obfuscate what really happened at WTC 7 and push the official version, now increasingly under scrutiny, we can expect the world’s largest media corporation to ignore Jennings’ narrative, recorded last year by Avery and Loose Change co-creator, Jason Bermas.
"This is vital information because it is in direct conflict with the official claim that no one was killed inside building 7. The 9/11 Commission report did not even mention building, yet here we have a key witness who told them he saw dead people inside the building after explosions had gutted the lower level," wrote Steve Watson on June 19, 2007.
What makes all this information even more explosive is the fact that this individual [now revealed to be Barry Jennings] was interviewed by the 9/11 Commission as they conducted their so called investigation.
The fact that the building was not even mentioned in the report in light of this information thus becomes chilling and indicates that officials have lied in stating that they have not come into contact with evidence of explosive devices within the buildings.
Avery and Bermas successfully contacted the individual after discovering a TV interview he did on 9/11 while they were trawling through news footage from the day in research for the Final Cut.
As this video documents, there were bombs in the buildings, a fact scrubbed from the official whitewash narrative, essentially a fairy tale.
Jennings’ description of dead bodies in the bombed out lobby of WTC 7 underscores multiple accounts of bombs in the buildings, from firefighters, law enforcement officers, and other extremely credible witnesses, including the New York Fire Department Chief of Safety, the Assistant Fire Commissioner, and an FBI agent quoted by USA Today (see video at left). For a comprehensive review of these accounts and many others, see Firefighters and law enforcement officers believe that bombs inside the WTC brought down the buildings on the Global Research site.
It will be interesting to see how the BBC handles this aspect of the WTC 7 collapse. More than likely, they will ignore Avery’s evidence and push the ludicrous fairy tale that fire so weakened the building it had to be "pulled," as Larry Silverstein so infamously claimed in the PBS’ propaganda piece, "America Rebuilds." As should be obvious to all who pay attention, the textbook demolition of WTC 7 undermines the entire official fairy tale of what happened on the morning of September 11, 2001, and that is why it was not included in the whitewash commission’s report, although NIST has since lamely attempted to blame the collapse on the improbable failure of a single column that supposedly lead to the subsequent failure of the building’s 27 core columns, precipitating a total collapse.
Fairy tales aside, it should be obvious what happened to WTC 7 — it was fitted with a bomb or bombs and was intended to collapse at approximately the same time as the other buildings. This plan failed miserably and the September 11 conspirators had no choice but to bring the building down late in the afternoon — to "pull it," as Silverstein explained — and hurriedly cobble together a fantastic and unbelievable explanation that fire had weakened the steel frame structure and precipitated its collapse.
Mr. Jennings story demolishes the official fairy tale version and it will be interesting to see how the BBC and the corporate media deal with his story. More than likely, they will continue to ignore the facts — the WTC buildings were brought down through demolition, not as a result of fire, and Mr. Jennings’ story serves as a capstone in the ongoing effort to bring out the truth and ultimately bring to justice the perpetrators.
Historically, the only way a modern office building has ever been made to collapse vertically in free-fall, as observed in WTC Building 7, is through the use of shaped cutter charges detonated in a timed sequence.
The collapse of New York's World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001 is arguably one of the most well documented events in human history. Less well documented is the controversy over why the buildings fell as they did.
At the time of writing, 357 architectural and engineering professionals have signed a petition which directly challenges the National Institute of Standards & Training's official finding that the destruction of these massive buildings was caused solely by structural damage from the impact of jet airliners and the resulting fires.
The petition, demanding of Congress a truly independent investigation, states, in part:
"...the 9/11 investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that may have been the actual cause behind the destruction of the World Trade Center Towers and WTC Building 7."
This alarming statement is based on evidence from many sources, including observations of the structural behaviour of the towers as they collapsed, the known characteristics of steel framed buildings, eyewitness testimony of explosions, and research into the chemical composition of dust recovered from the collapse zone.
Current research indicates that an incendiary (thermite) may have been used to sever the massive box columns of the towers, causing the buildings to plummet to the ground at close to free-fall speed.
Chemical analysis has been conducted by a multi-disciplinary team led by Professor Steven E. Jones and the results published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies.
The membership of Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth is worldwide, and qualified Australians have made contributions. Dr. Frank Legge, a chemist, has co-authored a peer reviewed paper, and Dr. David Leifer of the Faculty of Architecture at the University of Sydney is a registered member of the group.
A major focus of research is the mysterious collapse of the 47 storey WTC 7 (Salomon Brothers) Building, which was not hit by any plane, yet suddenly collapsed into its own footprint late in the afternoon of September 11, 2001.
Building 7 came down in six and a half seconds, generating a massive dust-cloud similar to the one that had enveloped Manhattan when the Twin Towers collapsed earlier the same day.
Researchers contend that only explosives could have provided enough energy to cause the pulverisation of thousands of tons of concrete into dust, and they highlight the symmetrical, free-fall collapse of the building through the path of greatest resistance, indicating that the supporting columns offered no resistance to the falling mass above.
Historically, the only way a modern office building has ever been made to collapse vertically in free-fall, as observed in WTC Building 7, is through the use of shaped cutter charges detonated in a timed sequence.
This procedure is known as controlled demolition, and requires a precise placement of explosives which are designed to cut through supports successively, usually from the bottom up, pulling buildings down under their own weight.
The collapse of Building 7 is visually identical to a controlled demolition, as illustrated in a side by side comparison on Youtube. Demolition expert Danny Jowenko has gone on record confirming this observation. "A team of experts did this", he said.
The essence of why we need a new investigation into the World Trade Center collapses is summed up in a recent paper by Dr. Frank Legge:
"As no reports have come to light of any steel framed buildings collapsing due to fire, and as all steel framed buildings which had collapsed had done so due to explosive demolition, the logical way to have started the investigation of this surprising event would have been to question whether explosives had been used. This apparently did not occur.
The organisations carrying out the investigations clearly selectively collected data and contrived arguments to support the fire theory and ignored contradictory evidence. This is in defiance of the scientific method and flouts the ethical standard of behaviour which the public is entitled to receive from their paid servants."
The hypothesis of controlled demolition finds further support in many eyewitness accounts, including live TV coverage, which described massive explosions in the lower levels of the World Trade Center prior to the collapse.
William Rodriguez, an acknowledged hero of 9/11 who single-handedly rescued fifteen people from the North Tower, described a massive explosion in the basement which occurred before the first plane struck, pushing him upwards out of the seat of his chair.
The New York Fire Department's oral histories project contains 118 witness statements which are strongly consistent with explosive demolition. Incredibly, none of this shocking testimony was included or acknowledged in any official investigation, including the 9/11 Commission.
There is a groundswell of public pressure from family members of victims and ordinary people the world over, to re-open the investigation of 9/11. As seen in the groundbreaking film 9/11: Press For Truth, it was due to the pressure of a group of victim family members, known as the Jersey Girls, that the 9/11 Commission was created, and yet that same commission failed to answer the majority of questions raised by these courageous women.
Films such as Loose Change and 9/11 Mysteries have been viewed by millions on the internet, and opinion polls have consistently shown that a large proportion of the public does not accept the official narrative of 9/11. Many believe there has been a major cover-up, while others believe that September 11 was an "inside job".
As an Australian, I believe there is an urgent need for a new investigation for several reasons.
First, there is the war in Afghanistan, which has already claimed thousands of lives, and appears to have no end in sight. If the 9/11 official narrative proves to be false, then the attack on Afghanistan may be a war crime.
Second, there is the continued erosion of civil liberties in the form of anti-terror legislation, and increases in police powers of surveillance and detention, which relies largely on 9/11 as the primary justification.
Finally, there are core values of truth, decency and justice at stake, which I wish to uphold and which I ask all Australians to join me in upholding as I say to our elected leaders, with all due respect, we need a new investigation.
Geez...trying to do two thigs at once... The two major biulshits that you are promoting are the 707 scenario and ignoring the fact that the WTC was NOT a steel framed building.
Ground Zero Building Catches Fire, Doesn't Collapse
Prisonplanet.com Sunday Aug 19, 2007
The 40 story Deutsche Bank building next to the ground zero site in New York, where the world trade center once stood, caught fire yesterday and burned intensely for seven hours without collapsing.
This represents another modern day miracle in light of the commonly accepted premise that since 9/11, all steel buildings that suffer limited fire damage implode within two hours. This building had even suffered structural damage on 9/11 and had been partially dismantled.
The raging fire, which killed two firefighters, was finally declared under control late saturday afternoon, a full seven hours after it had begun to burn.
On 9/11 the south tower of the WTC burned for just 56 minutes before collapsing, while the north tower lasted around an hour and 45 minutes. According to the official transcripts of the firefighter tapes, fires in both towers were almost out immediately before the collapses.
The saving grace that could have prevented Deutsche Bank from imploding may have been the fact that it was not hit by a plane, as the twin towers were on 9/11.
However, the absence of a jet strike wasn't enough to prevent WTC 7 from crumbling into its own footprint within 7 seconds later that fateful afternoon.
Hundreds of buildings worldwide suffered major fires that gutted the entire facade of their structure before 9/11 and did not collapse, but since the twin towers behaved differently, rather than consider an alternative explanation for the collapse of the towers, experts simply decided to reverse the fundamental precepts of all known physics to make it easier for everyone to understand.
Since that time, it has been commonly accepted that limited fires in tall buildings are 99% certain to cause an almost instantaneous collapse.
More pictures and an AP report on the latest blaze follow.
Major WTC Insurance Company Questions Building 7 Collapse As Potential Fraud
PR Web | May 4 2005
RELATED: WTC 7 Imploded by Silverstein, FDNY and Others
A proposal by a small shareholder to withhold approval from the Board of Directors for failure to investigate signs of insurance fraud on 9/11 has been published on the website of the Allianz Group, one of the world’s largest insurers, in preparation for its May 4th annual meeting.
(PRWEB) May 2, 2005 -- Allianz Group published a shareholder proposal on April 20th faulting management for ignoring signs of insurance fraud on 9/11/2001. Allianz carried a significant portion of the insurance coverage on the WTC, and stands to pay a corresponding portion of the $3.5 billion payout currently being litigated in New York. In his proposal, shareholder John Leonard, a California native and a publisher of books on 9/11, pointed to reports that building WTC 7 apparently collapsed by demolition, and for no plausible reason related to the 9/11 attacks. Management replied that it relied on official US government reports which made no mention of such evidence.
The Allianz Group is incorporated in Germany and has approximately 570,000 shareholders. Under German Stock Companies law, publicly held companies are required to publish shareholder proposals that meet certain criteria.
The text of the shareholder proposal, which may also be viewed at the Allianz website, http://www.allianzgroup.com/azgrp/dp/cda/0,,100646-49,00.html, is reproduced below.
An investigation of WTC 7's collapse, evidence of controlled demolition. www.wtc7.net/ - 7k - Cached -
An investigation of WTC 7's collapse, evidence of controlled demolition.
Building 7 was the third skyscraper to be reduced to rubble on September 11, 2001. According to the government, fires, primarily, leveled this building, but fires have never before or since destroyed a steel skyscraper.
The team that investigated the collapse were kept away from the crime scene. By the time they published their inconclusive report in May, 2002, the evidence had been destroyed.
Why did the government rapidly recycle the steel from the largest and most mysterious engineering failure in world history, and why has the media remained silent?
The Core Structures The Structural System of the Twin Towers
Each tower was supported by a structural core extending from its bedrock foundation to its roof. The cores were rectangular pillars with numerous large columns and girders, measuring 87 feet by 133 feet. The core structures housed the elevators, stairs, and other services. The cores had their own flooring systems, which were structurally independent of the floor diaphragms that spanned the space between the cores and the perimeter walls. The core structures, like the perimeter wall structures, were 100 percent steel-framed.
Reports on the number of core columns vary from 44 to 47. The exact arrangement of the columns is not known due to the secrecy of detailed engineering drawings of the towers. It is clear from photographs, such as the one on the right, that the core columns were abundantly cross-braced.
Establishing the true nature of the core structures is of great importance given that the most widely read document on the World Trade Center attack -- the 9/11 Commission Report -- denies their very existence, claiming the towers' cores were "hollow steel shaft[s]:" For the dimensions, see FEMA report, "World Trade Center Building Performance Study," undated. In addition, the outside of each tower was covered by a frame of 14-inch-wide steel columns; the centers of the steel columns were 40 inches apart. These exterior walls bore most of the weight of the building. The interior core of the buildings was a hollow steel shaft, in which elevators and stairwells were grouped. Ibid. For stairwells and elevators, see Port Authority response to Commission interrogatory, May 2004. 1 column base The top illustration indicates what may have been typical dimensions and thickness of the smaller core columns, about half-way up the tower. The outermost rows of core columns were apparently considerably larger, measuring 54 inches wide. Columns
The core columns were steel box-columns that were continuous for their entire height, going from their bedrock anchors in the sub-basements to near the towers' tops, where they transitioned to H-beams. Apparently the box columns, more than 1000 feet long, were built as the towers rose by welding together sections several stories tall. The sections were fabricated by mills in Japan that were uniquely equipped to produce the large pieces. 2
Some of the core columns apparently had outside dimensions of 36 inches by 16 inches. Others had larger dimensions, measuring 52 inches by 22 inches. 3 The core columns were oriented so that their longer dimensions were perpendicular to the core structures' longer, 133-foot-wide sides. Construction photographs found at the Skyscraper Museum in New York City indicate that the outermost rows of core columns on the cores' longer sides were of the larger dimensions. Both the FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study and the NIST's Draft Report on the Twin Towers fail to disclose the dimensions of the core columns, and the NIST Report implies that only the four core columns on each core's corners had larger dimensions.
Like the perimeter columns -- and like steel columns in all tall buildings -- the thickness of the steel in the core columns tapered from bottom to top. Near the bottoms of the towers the steel was four inches thick, whereas near the tops it may have been as little as 1/4th inch thick. The top figure in the illustration to the right is a cross-section of one of the smaller core columns from about half-way up a tower, where the steel was about two inches thick. The bottom figure shows the base of one of the larger core columns, where the steel was five inches thick. The bases of the columns also had slabs of steel running through their centers, making them almost solid. Column Arrangement
The exact arrangement of the columns and how they were cross-braced is not apparent from public documents such as FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study. The arrangement of box columns depicted in Figure 2-10 of Chapter 2 (pictured to the right) seems plausible, even though it contradicts other illustrations in the report showing a more random arrangement. It depicts the top floors of a tower and does not indicate the widths of the columns on a typical floor. Cross-Bracing
Construction photographs show that the core columns were connected to each other at each floor by large square girders and I-beams about two feet deep. The debris photograph below shows what appears to be one of the smaller core columns surrounded by perpendicular I-beams approximately three feet deep. In addition, the tops of core structures were further connected by the sloping beams of the hat truss structures.
This photograph from Ground Zero is apparently of one of the smaller core columns connected to a set of I-beams. This image from the documentary Up From Zero shows the base of a core column, whose dimensions, minus the four flanges, are apparently 52 by 22 inches, with walls at least 5 inches thick. References
1. 9-11 Commission Report; NOTES; Chapter 9 Heroism and Horror; Note 1, 9-11Commission.gov, 2. APPENDIX B: Structural Steel and Steel Connections, FEMA.gov, 2002 3. World's Tallest Towers Begin to Show Themselves on New York City Skyline, Engineering News Record, 1/1/1970
The towers were designed and built in the mid-1960s through the early 1970s. They represented a new approach to skyscrapers in that they were to be very lightweight and involved modular construction methods in order to accelerate the schedule and to reduce the costs.
To a structural engineer, a skyscraper is modeled as a large cantilever vertical column. Each tower was 64 m square, standing 411 m above street level and 21 m below grade. This produces a height-to-width ratio of 6.8. The total weight of the structure was roughly 500,000 t, but wind load, rather than the gravity load, dominated the design. The building is a huge sail that must resist a 225 km/h hurricane. It was designed to resist a wind load of 2 kPa—a total of lateral load of 5,000 t.
In order to make each tower capable of withstanding this wind load, the architects selected a lightweight “perimeter tube” design consisting of 244 exterior columns of 36 cm square steel box section on 100 cm centers
...
The clean-up of the World Trade Center will take many months. After all, 1,000,000 t of rubble will require 20,000 to 30,000 truckloads to haul away the material. The asbestos fire insulation makes the task hazardous for those working nearby. Interestingly, the approximately 300,000 t of steel is fully recyclable and represents only one day’s production of the U.S. steel industry. Separation of the stone and concrete is a common matter for modern steel shredders. The land-filling of 700,000 t of concrete and stone rubble is more problematic. However, the volume is equivalent to six football fields, 6–9 m deep, so it is manageable.
The towers' perimeter walls comprised dense grids of vertical steel columns and horizontal spandrel plates. These, along with the core structures, supported the towers. In addition to supporting gravity loads, the perimeter walls stiffened the Towers against lateral loads, particularly those due to winds. The fact that these structures were on the exterior of the Towers made them particularly efficient at carrying lateral loads. Richard Roth, speaking on behlf of the architectural firm that designed the Towers, described each of the perimeter walls as essentially "a steel beam 209' deep." 1 Regardless, it is clear that the core structures were designed to support several times the weight of each tower by themselves.
~snip~
When the perimeter SUPPORT walls were compromised and further, lesser load bearing support systems became compromised over time, there was only one ossible outcome.
A steel framed building is one in which the ENTIRE structure is effectively laticed I-Beams fashioned into rectangles and/or squares and walls and floors are then constructed using them as support. I posted a picture of one above...
The WTC was constructed as a hollow tube external wall support structure that would bear both horizontal and lateral loads while an inner core would have some horizontal support function as well as provide for a hanger for the floors instead of the usual system of columns:
The tubular framing system for the perimeter walls resisted all of the lateral forces imposed by wind and earthquake, as well as the impact loads imposed on September 11. Although we had used closely spaced columns in an earlier building, it was Minoru Yamasaki who proposed that we use narrow windows in the WTC towers to give people a sense of security as they looked down from on high. Our contribution was to make the closely spaced columns the fundamental lateral- force-resisting system for the two towers. The tubular framing system also precluded the need for the customary 30-foot column spacing in interior areas, making column-free, rentable space structurally desirable.
Two kinds of 9-11 truth deniers (debunkers) exist today: Those who deny our government has the expertise to carry out the 9-11 attack, and those who deny ... www.rense.com/general73/whyd.htm - 29k -
The 40 story Deutsche Bank building next to the ground zero site in New York, where the world trade center once stood, caught fire yesterday and burned intensely for seven hours without collapsing.
Well, of course it didn't. No Magickal Jet Fuel™. If a drop of that had hit it, it would have been doomed.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
You sound like a member of the knuckledragger crew over at FreeRepublic. As I said earlier, I really don't want to waste my time trying to have an exchange of ideas with a person who is either extremely stupid and will NEVER accept anything that contradicts his fairytale illusion of what is real, or one who is PURPOSELY ACTING stupid in order to perform his duties as assigned by his superiors.
I might toss out some relevent info from time to time, but you are either not intelligent enough to comprehend it or you deliberately ignoring the simple truths that I present.
I've often delt with disinformation specialists over the many years I've been posting on FR and later LP. I had gone back and forth for days, weeks, and sometimes even months and years with the best (or worst) of them. You don't rate that sort of attention. Here on 4um people don't buy the bullshit you sort of people are selling, so I don't need to be as active in exposing you and your lies, people already know what the situation is...
"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
In addition to supporting gravity loads, the perimeter walls stiffened the Towers against lateral loads
Do you even know what a LATERAL LOAD is? It's the load placed upon the walls of the building exerted by the wind. So what's your point?
"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
#325. To: FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, itus, James Deffenbach (#323)
I might toss out some relevent info from time to time, but you are either not intelligent enough to comprehend it or you deliberately ignoring the simple truths that I present.
Dude...seriously...nothing you've presented has withstood scrutiny. Nothing.
You folks act as if it was a fly that hit the towers that day...I was there...I have never heard anything as loud as those two planes hitting those towers...
You've seen the destruction that plane crashes cause when they hit earth...what makes you believe that what was inside the Towers would NOT have been destroyed?
You keep comparing the WTC to "steel framed buildings". I have shown you several times over that the buildings were NOT steel framed. I ahve provided you with the words of the Structural Engineer who has explained the hollow tube construction method that was used. Yet, still, you insist on comparing the WTC to steel framed buildings.
I have given you the words of the structural engineer who said that the 707 scenario was NOT the same scenario as what occurred on 9/11. Yet, still, you insist on ignoring that and creating yoru own bizarre 707 scenario as if it were fact.
Doouschenbag keeps trying to promote ther idea/belief that the govenment findfings were that jet fuel btrought the towers down. I posted the exact statement from the NIST Report which states SPECIFICALLY that jet fule did not cause the collapse.
TwentyTwelve has spammed this trhead in the obvious hopes that he can befuddle me with bullshit. I went through his mess and refuted several points and sourced them. His response was to continue to post spam that repeated the same bullshit that I had refuted...
Yep...it's the horizontal load...gravity load is verticall load...the outer support had to be strong enough to serve a dual purpose. THAT is what you are grnoring...when the outer support was breached, the buildings weight bearing mechinism was compromised both vertical and lateral...when the core was damaged by the impact and explosion it was furher breached...when the trusses holding the platform gave way, the WHOLE Building was at the mercy of gravity.
The "framing" of the WTC was a core inside of a hollow tube with platforms on trusses. I've posted the structural enigneer tellign you exactly that. Why do you ignore it?
THAT is what you are grnoring...when the outer support was breached, the buildings weight bearing mechinism was compromised both vertical and lateral...
Only a small part of the outer support was damaged, and the central core was relatively unscathed. The "horizontal load" is just a red herring as it has no bearing on the building's ability to support the weight of the building itself.
The fires did not burn long enough to heat the structure to a point it would weaken the steel, as the building acted as a huge heatsink and dissipated the heat from the office fires.
Even IF a few floors had collapsed at the height of the actual damage, there would not have been enough energy to cause a total collapse of the building.
And you STILL haven't answered the following questions;
A) Given that the time it would have taken for an object to fall from the top of the building was only several seconds less than the time it took for the buildings to totally collapse, the fact is, it only took several seconds for 100 or so floors built of steel and concrete to be pulverized and destroyed. How do you explain that?
B) What happened to the core? If the floors had pancaked as claimed, they should have slid down the core and the core should have remained standing.
C) The spire (remnant of the core) was seen for about 20 seconds after the collapse, then it apparently vaporized into dust. How do you explain that?
D) The towers were designed to withstand an impact of a heavier and faster aircraft than those which impacted it. How do you explain the fact they failed when they were designed to withstand that event?
"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
Dude...seriously...nothing you've presented has withstood scrutiny. Nothing.
Dude, you ignored my questions and answered them with something resembling a wild eyed sermon.
You can not answer the questions because the only answers (honest answers at least) would be something contrary to your religious devotion to the government tale.
"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
Only a small part of the outer support was damaged
Ther3e you go again...you posted that above and were shown to be incorrect:
The fires did not burn long enough to heat the structure to a point it would weaken the steel, as the building acted as a huge heatsink and dissipated the heat from the office fires.
Once again you posted that above and were refuted:
Given that the time it would have taken for an object to fall from the top of the building was only several seconds less than the time it took for the buildings to totally collapse, the fact is, it only took several seconds for 100 or so floors built of steel and concrete to be pulverized and destroyed.
A) The steel was not pulverized...they only things that were pulverized were oobjets that could be pulverized.
Microscopic analysis of WTC dust by Nicholas Petraco, BS, MS, DABC, FAAFS, FNYMS at The New York Microscopic Society lecture held at AMNH 28 May 2003:
45.1% Fiberglass, rock wool (insulation, fireproofing)
Trace asbestos (it became illegal to use during the construction of the WTC)
Other trace elements: aluminum, paint pigments, blood, hair, glass wool with resin, and prescription drugs were found.
Oddly missing is...wait for it...STEEL...
B) I posted a chart above showing that the collapse took time well in excess of free fall speed.
What happened to the core?
INertia and gravity destroyed it,
The towers were designed to withstand an impact of a heavier and faster aircraft than those which impacted it. How do you explain the fact they failed when they were designed to withstand that event?
And there you go yet again...I POST THE WORDS OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER WHO STATED THAT IS BULLSHIT...I POSTED THE SPECS OF THE 707 V 767 THAT SHOWED YOU THAT STETMENT OF CONTRAST IS BULLSHIT.
O_I posted this farther upthread and this is just a short excerpt. I thought it was great.
For this, its necessary to sweep aside the second law of thermodynamics and propose Kerosene which is not only impossibly destructive, but also recycles itself for a second burning in violation of the law of degradation of energy. You see, it not only consumed itself in a sudden catastrophic fireball , vapourising a sixty-five ton plane into nothing, but then came back for a second go, burning at 2000 degrees centigrade for another hour at the impact point, melting the skyscraper's steel like butter. And while it was doing all this it also poured down the elevator shafts, starting fires all through the building. When I was at school there was a little thing called the entropy law which suggests that a given portion of fuel can only burn once, something which is readily observable in the real world, even for those who didn't make it to junior high school science. But this is no problem for the conspiracy theorist. Gleefully, they claim that a few thousand gallons of Kerosene is enough to:
- Completely vapourise a sixty-five ton aircraft
- Have enough left over to burn ferociously enough for over an hour at the impact point to melt steel - melting point about double the maximum combustion temperature of the fuel
- Still have enough left over to pour down the elevator shafts and start similarly destructive fires all through the building
This Kerosene really is remarkable stuff! How chilling to realize that those Kerosene heaters we had in the house when I was a kid were deadly bombs, just waiting to go off. One false move and the entire street might have been vapourised. And never again will I take Kerosene lamps out camping. One moment you're there innocently holding the lamp - the next - kapow! Vapourised into nothing along with with the rest of the camp site, and still leaving enough of the deadly stuff to start a massive forest fire.
These whackos are actually claiming that the raging inferno allegedly created by the miraculously recycling, and impossibly hot burning Kerosene melted or at least softened the steel supports of the skyscraper. Oblivious to the fact that the black smoke coming from the WTC indicates an oxygen starved fire - therefore not particularly hot - they trumpet an alleged temperature in the building of 2000 degrees centigrade, without a shred of evidence to support this curious suspension of the laws of physics.
Not content with this ludicrous garbage, they then contend that as the steel frames softened, they came straight down instead of buckling and twisting and falling sideways.
Since they're already re-engineered the combustion qualities of jet fuel, violated the second law of thermodynamics, and redefined the structural properties of steel, why let a little thing like the laws of gravity get in the way?
The tower fell in a time almost identical to that of a free falling object, dropped from that height, meaning that its physically impossible for it to have collapsed by the method of the top floors smashing through the lower floors. But according to the conspiracy theorists, the laws of gravity were temporarily suspended on the morning of September 11th. It appears that the evil psychic power of those dreadful Arabs knew no bounds. Even after they were dead, they were able, by the power of their evil spirits, to force down the tower at a speed physically impossible under the laws of gravity, had it been meeting any resistance from fireproofed steel structures originally designed to resist many tons of hurricane force wind as well as the impact of a Boeing passenger jet straying off course.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
And there you go yet again...I POST THE WORDS OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER WHO STATED THAT IS BULLSHIT...I POSTED THE SPECS OF THE 707 V 767 THAT SHOWED YOU THAT STETMENT OF CONTRAST IS BULLSHIT.
What, is he saying that the WTC was NOT designed to withstand the impact of a 707?
The 767 was carrying less than half its fuel capacity, and its fuel capacity was about the same as a 707. A 707 cruises at 607 mph, and a 767 cruises at 530 mph.
So what part of that don't you understand?
"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
Yep, yet people like war can't understand any of that...
"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
What, is he saying that the WTC was NOT designed to withstand the impact of a 707?
Once again for the Fuctionally Stupid:
The two towers were the first structures outside of the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airliner, the Boeing 707. It was assumed that the jetliner would be lost in the fog, seeking to land at JFK or at Newark. To the best of our knowledge, little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance. Indeed, at that time, no fireproofing systems were available to control the effects of such fires.
Ther3e you go again...you posted that above and were shown to be incorrect:
Are you trying to say that the rising smoke is actual damage to the building? It was only several floors that had exterior damage, and that was restricted to the entry and exit points. The load of the upper floors was still being supported by the central core, and very little load was distributed about the exterior walls, which themselves were steel columns of which only relatively small sections were damaged.
In fact, there is very little apparent damage to the exterior wall's steel columns from the images you posted, just flames shooting out of broken windows.
"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
Are you trying to say that the rising smoke is actual damage to the building?
Nope.
Want to guess again? Maybe if you read what you stated and then carry that context over the the picture it might hit you. I'm not optoimistic tho.
It was only several floors that had exterior damage, and that was restricted to the entry and exit points.
Bullshit...the planes exploded inside the building...I am stumped for an apy adjective to quantify the level of stupidity required ot believe that such an explosion was confined only to the "entry and exit" points. Your claim is that the plane hit the towers...did nothing until it rached the next wall at which time it exploded outward doing no damage in between. My IQ alone dropped 65 points tyoing it...I can imagine how much iot has to drop to actually ***think*** that.
In fact, there is very little apparent damage to the exterior wall's steel columns
little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance. Indeed, at that time, no fireproofing systems were available to control the effects of such fires.
--Leslie Robertson, Cheif Structural Engineer WTC
Wherever you obtained that quote apparently can't even spell the word CHIEF.
What you fail to consider is that the fires did not burn hot enough to weaken the structure. The thermal energy released by the office fires was not sufficient to heat any steel support members to a point where they would weaken.
Regardless, how do you explain the fact that it only took several seconds to demolish 100 floors of undamaged steel and concrete?
"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
Bullshit...the planes exploded inside the building...
Bullshit. The majority of the jet fuel exploded OUTSIDE of the buildings and resulted in massive fireballs, as any video of the impacts would show.
Yes there was SOME fuel that burned inside the building, yet there were survivors from the very floors that were impacted, so there was not a massive explosion INSIDE the building as you claim. Well, not from the impacts at least, those explosions came later...
"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
Maybe if you read what you stated and then carry that context over the the picture it might hit you.
Post either of the two images and point out the actual damage to the exterior columns.
"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
"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
Inertia? It was at rest, so its inertia would have been to RESIST motion in any direction.
Gravity? It was designed to SUPPORT a MASSIVE load.
The pancake theory insists that the trusses buckled and caused a collapse of the FLOORS but does not accout for the damage to the CORE. The CORE could NOT pancake as it was a rigid structure.
Try again.
"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
The steel was not pulverized...they only things that were pulverized were oobjets that could be pulverized.
"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
Again, you fail to address the question as to why it only took several seconds to demolish 100 floors of undamaged steel and concrete.
"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
"CERTIFIED STEEL COMPONENTS USED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WTC BUILDINGS"!
The collapse of the WTC by Kevin Ryan Site Manager Environmental Health Laboratories A Division of Underwriters Laboratories Thursday, Nov 11, 2004
...the company I work for certified the steel components used in the construction of the WTC buildings. In requesting information from both our CEO and Fire Protection business manager last year, I learned that they did not agree on the essential aspects of the story, except for one thing - that the samples we certified met all requirements.
...
"We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F (2)."
STACKING UP While site concrete was largely pulverized into fine dust, huge quantities of damaged structural steel lay in tangled heaps throughout the former 16-acre WTC site. "I saw I-beams stacked six stories high," says Allen Morse, chief debris expert for the Army Corps of Engineers, a technical advisor to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. He says steel could make up to as much as half of the site's estimated 1.2 million tons of wreckage. "You can't move machinery around unless you plan for it," adds Morse.
To accelerate steel removal, Weeks Marine Inc. has created two steel offloading areas that ramped up operations last week to transport debris by barge for recycling. The sites are located at Pier 25 on the Hudson River and at Pier 6 at the tip of lower Manhattan. The city's usual garbage removal facilities, which is handling smaller site debris, could not accommodate steel pieces.
Weeks was still dredging the Pier 25 site even as trucks began delivering steel to the site for offloading by crane to barges that can hold up to 3,000 tons. "That's equivalent to 150 truckloads," says Weeks Senior Vice President George Wittich. Business was slow at first as truck-drivers maneuvered through the site and city streets and had to pass muster with FBI officials checking for evidence. One site source says security was beefed up after some drivers sold steel privately to scrap dealers.
Wittich says the city has awarded contracts to two private scrap dealers to handle 50,000 tons of steel. The rest is expected to be used to create offshore artificial reefs or head for "upland" disposal. While the company obtained dredging permits in seemingly record time, environmental permits for steel disposal have yet to be issued. "The rate that the stuff can be brought to the reef is less than what's coming out," says Weeks President Richard S. Weeks. Wittich says larger steel debris, as big as 30 tons, may be used for slurry wall stabilization.
Picture (L): For the second chapter — On September 11th — the team sought items to represent the hellish forces unleashed that day. "We saw a lot of pieces like this," said Wagner. "Typically, when steel bends, it buckles and tears. The smooth bend on this piece shows the steel became malleable — a pretty good indication of how hot it was."
RICH GARLOCK: Going below, it was smoky and really hot. We had rescue teams with meters for oxygen and carbon dioxide. They also had temperature monitors. Here WTC 6 is over my head. The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running. I did some quick numbers with Gary Panariello, an engineer from Thornton-Tomasetti, to try and determine what the load on WTC 6 was and how much of the lateral system of the building the contractor could take down. There were a lot of judgment calls; people had immediate needs and needed immediate responses.
Picture (R) - More Bent Steel "This piece has a ribbon-like quality to it," noted Wagner. "It's like it just crumpled when it hit the ground." Engineers have noted that many of the Towers' girders were contorted into shapes unreplicable by any machine.
Some 200,000 tons of structural steel encased and supported the Twin Towers. This piece was saved as a reminder of each building's distinctive skeleton.
The core columns were massive indeed runninng up 1000 feet from the bedrock and welded together in multi-story sections. The wall of these boxes were from two to five inches thick.
Many posters have referenced the adiabatic flame temperature at which kerosene burns (just shy of 1800° F) which is a theoretical maximum oxidation temperature not even achieved within jet engines, when in reality at standard pressure and temperature in an open flame, kerosene burns at a maximum 575° F in a well ventilated environment.
It is difficult to imagine that such massive core structures could seriously have been weakened by an aromatic liquid fueled fire, viz. the high rise holocausts in Madrid, Colombia and Shanghai. To take this kind of damage at face value, one would have to discount not only the much higher temperatures required to weaken or melt steel, but also ignore the ability of such a large volume of steel to conduct great quantities of heat away from its source.
Many posters have referenced the adiabatic flame temperature at which kerosene burns (just shy of 1800° F) which is a theoretical maximum oxidation temperature not even achieved within jet engines, when in reality at standard pressure and temperature in an open flame, kerosene burns at a maximum 575° F in a well ventilated environment.
575° F?
Ovens can get hotter than that.
I believe you though.
The WTC towers were demolished by elements withing our government and stooges are paid to try to keep a lid on it. They might want to think about firing war though, he is not feeling well.
This link was possibly posted here before but in case it hasn't appeared before, I thought it was informative because it was a site associated with 622 architects and engineers, who dispute the official 9/11 gubment story:
622 architectural and engineering professionals... and 3252 other supporters including A&E students have signed the petition demanding of Congress a truly independent investigation.
This what Frank A. DeMartini, WTC construction and project manager said...
quote: "The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it, that was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building could probably sustain multiple impacts of jet liners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door - this intense grid - and the plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting."
WTC 7's location Building 7 occupied a city block immediately north of the World Trade Center complex. WTC 1 through WTC 6 were on the superblock bounded by West, Church, Liberty, and Vesey Streets. Building 7 was wedged between the Verizon and U.S. Post Office buildings across Vesey Street from the WTC complex. It straddled an electrical substation that filled the first two stories of about half the block.
People who have heard of Building 7 tend to assume that 'ancillary damage' from the collapses of the Twin Towers had something to do with Building 7's collapse. It is important to note that Building 7 was no closer to the towers than any of several other large buildings outside of the WTC complex. The wall of Building 7 closest to the WTC complex was more than 300 feet from the nearest wall of the North Tower. It appears that nearly all of the heavy fallout from the disintegration of the North Tower landed short of Building 7. Building 6 stood between the North Tower and Building 7.
Absent any greater and opposite force, It had no choice but to drop straight down once the center of gravity was horizontally established.
Hey moron, there was something in the way of it dropping straight down, and it was called the WORLD TRADE CENTER. Are you that fucking insane that you think the entire structure of the WTC was actually an illusion, that it was really thin air?
The top of the tower had started to topple over, indicating one corner of the supporting structure below had failed. It should have continued in that direction, ABSENT ANY OTHER FORCE (or removal of an existing opposing force).
Only a TOTAL and INSTANTANEOUS collapse of the structure below (OR the possibility that the steel core had remained intact and the top of the tower actually SLID down the core) could explain the way it dropped DOWN instead of TUMBLING over.
Being that there would have been incredible resistance to such a fall from the supporting structure below AND the central core, the core should have burst out of the upwards angled side of the upper tower and the top of the tower should have toppled, since it was already on an angle and would have had horizontal forces acting upon it EVEN as it fell downwards. Considering the core was tapered as you so unthinkingly recite, the gradually thickening core would have provided increasing resistance to the top of the tower, slowing it down to where it should have STOPPED sliding down it IF it was in fact doing so.
Only a total and absolute demolition of ANY and ALL supporting structures below AND WITHIN (including the steel core) PRIOR to impact from the falling structure would explain the manner in which the towers collapsed.
"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
As you can seee, there were elevators within the core. Furthermore, the core was reliant on the exterior support beams to relieve it of being the lone horizontal load bearing mechanism.
There was not a hurricane going on that day, so resistance to horizonal force is not a factor. It's the VERTICAL support that mattered. Regardless, the majority of the exterior support columns were intact.
"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
911 Mysteries: Demolitions is the film that did the most to wake me up to the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center on 9/11. I highly recommend that everyone watch this film. If you want to know the truth about 9/11 please watch.
This what Frank A. DeMartini, WTC construction and project manager said...
quote: "The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it, that was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building could probably sustain multiple impacts of jet liners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door - this intense grid - and the plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting."
That's it. I've previously referenced the temperature from more authoritative sites which I can't find at the moment, but I'll cite WikiAnswers on this one.
I'm going out to the garage to do some fabrication work. Got some kerosene out there, and I think that I've got a thermometer that will go that high. I'll run a little experiment later and tell you how it turned out.
The top of the tower did topple over as you've been shown...
BTW, you contradict yourself here. Did it topple or did it drop staight down? It's easy to see the answer on various videos, but I'd like you to admit that it couldn't have done BOTH.
"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
This 110-story steel-framed office building suffered a fire on the 11th floor on February 13, 1975. The loss was estimated at over $2000000. ... www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_1975_fire.html - 9k - Cached -
The top of the tower did topple over as you've been shown...
BTW, you contradict yourself here. Did it topple or did it drop staight down? It's easy to see the answer on various videos, but I'd like you to admit that it couldn't have done BOTH.
I know what I saw in the videos....and it is a physical impossibility for it to do both.
Me: Oh and BTW, there were no "raging fires", there was a bit of a diesel fire inside but nothing close to a "raging fire".
war: You're out of your fucking mind. Do I need to post yet even more pictures showing how stupid you are?
You're busted. I just noticed you posted an image of WTC5 trying to pass it off as an image of WTC7. The image properties indicate the file name is http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/docs/wtc5_fire_floors.jpg, which shows that image depicts Building 5 not Building 7.
"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
Me: The individuals listed as the hijackers are not said to be using aliases
war: If they weren't who they said that then what else could they have been using?
Huh? Are you even an American? You don't speak the language very well...
"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
So.......were they wrong then or wrong after 9/11...."what steel frames"?????
lol!
That the 1975 fire was more intense than the 9/11 fires is evident from the fact that it caused the 11th floor east side windows to break and flames could be seen pouring from these broken windows. This indicates a temperature greater than 700°C. In the 9/11 fires the windows were not broken by the heat (only by the aircraft impact) indicating a temperature below 700°C.
So now you know that the WTC towers were well designed and quite capable of surviving a serious fire. I repeat that this was a very hot fire that burnt through the open-plan office area of the eleventh floor and spread up and down the central core area for many floors. This was a serious fire.
Original Scans from archived issues of The New York Times. on 9/11 the fires burned for much shorter times and were the official cause of collapse. We have also recently seen other tall steel buildings burn for hours and stay standing.
#372. To: war, Original_Intent, ALL (#194)(Edited)
Oh and BTW war, I also noticed you used screenshots from a flash presentation provided by the GOVERNMENT for its case against Zacarias Moussaoui. These are NOT flight manifests, but simply a visual aid created by the government.
As far as the FLIGHT MANIFESTS, well, go ahead and find 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
B) I posted a chart above showing that the collapse took time well in excess of free fall speed.
It must not have been very large or colorful since I can't find it anywhere on this thread. Please point out which post it was, and/or repost the chart.
"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
Oh and BTW war, I also noticed you used screenshots from a flash presentation provided by the GOVERNMENT for its case against Zacarias Moussaoui. These are NOT flight managests, but simply a visual aid created by the government.
As far as the FLIGHT MANIFESTS, well, go ahead and find them...
None of the official hijackers of the Sep11th-attack appeared on the original manifest of the passenger list.
Here is the official info about these "hijackers". Many of the real identities are still alive. The FBI ignored these facts during 2001-2002 and never updated their suspect list.
Another particularly important part of this is to note that Towers one, two, and seven have all of the 10 characteristics of a controlled demolition, a building collapsing from fire and plane impact damage having one of the characteristics of controlled demolition is astronomically rare, the chances of this damage having all 10 characteristics of a controlled demolition and not being a controlled demolition is next to nil. These characteristics are.
1. Each collapse occurred at virtually free fall speed;
2. Each building collapsed straight down, for the most part onto its own footprint;
3. Virtually all the concrete was turned into very fine dust;
4. In the case of the Twin Towers, the dust was blown out horizontally for 200 feet or more;
5. The collapses were total, leaving no steel columns sticking up hundreds of feet into the air;
6. Videos of the collapses reveal "demolition waves", meaning "confluent rows of small explosions";
7. Most of the steel beams and columns came down in sections that were no more than 30 feet long;
8. According to many witnesses, explosions occurred within the buildings;
9. Each collapse was associated with detectable seismic vibrations (suggestive of underground explosions);
10. Each collapse produced molten steel (which would be produced by explosives), resulting in "hot spots" that remained for months.?
Oh, one other bit of info war. You know that picture you misidentified as WTC7 where it was actually an image of WTC5, well that is captioned as follows in the following link...
Figure 4-13 from the FEMA Report shows WTC5 burning, with labeled floors.
"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
What you fail to consider is that the fires did not burn hot enough to weaken the structure.
What you Fail lto consider that a) they were already weakened from the impact and explposionn and b) that the fires did get hot enough to tweak the metal...
Look at any video of the second plane hitting the building...the explosion does not initiate outside of the building...it bursts FROM the building...
I knew Eurobroker guys in WTC 1 who were impacted by a fireball and explosion at the elevator crossover @ 44.
Your problem is that I know people who were in that building...who felt the impact explosion IN THE BUILDING...they didn't "hear it" outside the building.
Until it was acted upon by a plane travellng at 400+ MPH and then further acted upon by the energy expended in supporting more weight than that for which it was designed...unless for some stupid reason you believe that the plane came to a dead stop just before hitting it...which, given your insnae blatherings here, it would NOT surprise me if you did believe that...
It is important to note that Building 7 was no closer to the towers than any of several other large buildings outside of the WTC complex.
Fitterman is still undergoing reconstruction...the DB Building is being deconstructed. 1 Liberty was damaged massively and required a half year of reconstrcution.
That said, none of those buildings burned for 7 hours...
The top of the tower had started to topple over, indicating one corner of the supporting structure below had failed. It should have continued in that direction,
When you use the word "toppling" you imply that it was already in motion and that should have been propelled away from the building.
You need to grasp a basic concept of physics as to how gravity affects a body...once it's center is established...it falls straight down...the top of the tower was a body at rest and so while it was "tilted" it was so at rest...once the support beneath it gave way it was a simple exercise of falling...the only direction in which it should have continued was down...
The top of the tower had started to topple over, indicating one corner of the supporting structure below had failed. It should have continued in that direction, ABSENT ANY OTHER FORCE
The only force acting on it was gravity. Does gravity affect a body from the side?
#389. To: FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, litus, randge, scrapper2, James Deffenbach (#358)
There was not a hurricane going on that day, so resistance to horizonal force is not a factor.
Have you ever been in the Towers? If so then you know there is a natural sway to them...lateral forces were continually at work on them...
Secondly, as has been pointed out to you numerous times, the external support mitigated the vertical load and since the external support was compromised the energy being put upon and expended by the core was substanially more than normal.
Regardless, the majority of the exterior support columns were intact.
Feel free to wax eloquently on the WTC designer's using redundant support columns on the exterior.
Also, you want it both ways...you'll claim that it was controlled demolition that brought the towers down which is a process by which only some of the main supports are destroyed...but here you are claiming that because some of the support remained thatg it should not have collapsed.
Can any of you Moonbats explain to me, that if the government did this, why did they allow 22K people to escape with their lives and why did they go to the trouble of haing planes flyu into the buildings? The WTC had been bombed before. Why not just bomb it again?
BTW, you contradict yourself here. Did it topple or did it drop staight down?
Well...I was accepting your use of the word topple which I then disputed above...the top does move angularly for the brief moment it took to establish a center of gravity...
Secondly, as has been pointed out to you numerous times, the external support mitigated the vertical load and since the external support was compromised the energy being put upon and expended by the core was substanially more than normal.
No, the load put on the core would not have been significantly greater than normal. The vast majority of the exterior columns were undamaged so the change in load on the core would have been minimal.
In the 9/11 fires the windows were not broken by the heat (only by the aircraft impact) indicating a temperature below 700°C.
Nope.
The windows were broken by impact AND explosion.
But your starement is moronic from several other angles as well not the least of which was that since the fire was already vented all it had to do was feed and accelerate......
Please list your engineering credentials that you could contradict the designers...
The "designers" did not say that the load on the core was significantly greater. And even if they did any model of the WTC with similar damage would prove that it wasn't. Credentials are only required for people that need to prove a basic understanding of something to someone else becasue they have no real experience to speak of. I need no such crutch.
If they weren't who they said they were, then what else could they have been using?
Better?
Ok, now I can at least understand what you're trying to say. The thing is, there is no evidence that places those individuals onboard those doomed aircraft. They are NOT on the flight manifests from what I gather, and the flight manifests have not been made public, or if they were, they are no longer available.
Being that there is a strong possibility that the planes were taken over by remote control (which is QUITE feasibile and possible), especially when you consider the rather precise manuevers performed to line the planes up with the towers, then those individuals could very well have been decoys made to APPEAR as if they had hijacked the planes. It worked out rather well, with the majority of the populace believing it, and those who haven't fallen for it are quickly dismissed as "conspiracy theorists".
"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
the published values (I have seen) all fall in the range 8 – 18 seconds. In addition, Newtonian mechanics dictates a minimum value for the collapse time, tc, which is calculated, (allowing for the thickness of each floor), as followsf82;: tc = (2h/g) = h54;{2(416 f85;10)/9.81} = 9.1 seconds
Pure bullshit. It would have taken 9.2 seconds for a rock to fall to the ground from the top of the WTC, yet this person claims that it would have been possible for the tower to collapse FASTER than free fall speed. What did it have, a rocket engine on top of the tower pushing it down?
Unbelievable, to say the least.
"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
Can any of you Moonbats explain to me, that if the government did this, why did they allow 22K people to escape with their lives and why did they go to the trouble of haing planes flyu into the buildings? The WTC had been bombed before. Why not just bomb it again?
The planes flying into the buildings were needed for dramatic effect. It was a made for TV event. If they just blew the building up then they couldn't strip search pretty blonds at the airport and drive commercial airlines out of business. This operation was planned well in advanced and carefully researched to produce the most psychological bang for the buck.
"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
I posted the one from the Boston Globe on 9/13, doof.
Link it, as I haven't seen you post it.
"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
Why are you wasting your time here? We know you are a government stooge.
I don't understand your logic here. You promote theories of conspiracies which you expect me to just accept these without question.
Can you tell me how your expectations of me differ from those of what you claim I am?
The fact is, I have weighed your arguments and I have weighed the arguments of others. Your arguments fail to persuade me that the counter argument is more believable.
Part of your problem includes the fact that I was there that day. Another part of your problem is that I have spoken to people who were in BOTH towers. Another part of your problem is that I spoke to people who did not get out. I have also spoken to people who spoke to people who did not get out. Offices were damaged by the explosion throughout the building and not just at the point of impact.
Your paradigm here assumes that I have done 0 research into what happened that day. The premise underlying that paradigm is 100% incorrect.
Now, there are some elements that I can accept. I do believe that Boosh’s direct threat on the Taliban that Summer was, effectively, a "dare". I do believe that they had a good inkling that an attack was imminent but failed to act. I also believe that they used the attack as a pretext for eventually going after Iraq.
Now, considering that latter statement for one moment, don't you believe that given how the post 9/11 events played out and in the context of a belief that the government ACTUALLY precipitated and executed this plot, that they would have put Iraqi's on those planes?
That is the ONLY way that any of your blatherings would make a modicum of sense to me.
the top does move angularly for the brief moment it took to establish a center of gravity...
It already HAD a center of gravity until a portion of the structure below it gave way. Never mind trying to obfuscutate the matter, it simply fell in the direction of least resistance and that was into the corner that no longer had any support.
Its momentum was already causing it to topple, and if the core HAD broken at that moment it probably WOULD have flipped over as it smashed into the solid edge of the structure below.
Since it didn't, you'd have to assume the core was intact, although quite bent. So, the core should have remained where it was and been visible as the upper portion of the WTC slid down it. Of course it wasn't there, so what happened to it?
"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
Actually when it was attached ot the building it did not as the structure had a center of gravity. when that support broke the top established its own.
That's not a flight manifest, that's a graphical image designed according to GOVERNMENT data.
Now, show me the official airline flight manifest.
"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
Bro, did you try to balance that can on your finger as I suggested? You can squawk all you want about centers of gravity, yet that can will fall off your finger each time, and it WILL tumble.
You have no clue where the center of gravity was or wasn't in the upper portion of the WTC, as NOBODY could know since there is no way to know what part of the lower structure gave way and how long it supported the weight of the falling structure above.
However, once a solid section of structure was impacted, the upper structure should have acted as your finger trying to balance a can, where it would have acted as a fulcrum on which it would have pivoted downwards to where it would have tumbled over.
"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
I am not promoting anything. I am just not a brain dead moron. The towers being blown up is not something rational people debate about, it is too damn obvious they were blown up to debate it. If you really can't see something so obvious and/or lack basic understanding of physics which is required to know the buildings were without a doubt NOT taken down by just the planes impact, the mid-air explosion, and the fires, then I feel sorry for you.
I have sympathy for your condition if you are indeed not a government stooge.
Bullshit. Put the 9/11 stuff aside and it boils down to the fact that you have a point of view that differs from mine and it grates on you to the point of wanting to see me banned. I don't accept what you believe to be orthodoxy and so I should be made gone. You believe that because someone doesn't **think** as you do then they must be some kind of shill or instrument of misinormation.
Do you know what that says about you?
The towers being blown up is not something rational people debate about,
I agree.
If you really can't see something so obvious and/or lack basic understanding of physics which is required to know the buildings were without a doubt NOT taken down by just the planes impact, the mid-air explosion, and the fires, then I feel sorry for you.
Mid air explosion? The explosion was inside the building.
As for my understanding of physics...you've yet to demonstrate that I have none.
You have no clue where the center of gravity was or wasn't in the upper portion of the WTC
Are you trying to tell me that there was more than one center of gravity on one structure?
CoG is a fairly easy calculation but putting that aside, we know that basic design principles make it impossible to put the CoG outside of a building's footprint and at multiple points.
So, you can make the arguemnt that the plane's impact SHIFTED the CoG but you cannot then argue agasint the physics that gravity affects CoG by anything othe rthan straight down.
"It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down."
#424. To: war, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, randge, scrapper2, James Deffenbach (#389)
Have you ever been in the Towers? If so then you know there is a natural sway to them...lateral forces were continually at work on them...
Yes, I have. I've also been on the Empire State Building, built in 1931. One could easily suppose without a degree in engineering, that, given the materials and abilities back in the late 1920's as compared to those of the early 1970's, were not only quite different, but there were conceivably lower standards to be met.
Although the wind which blows against that tower is also quite severe and it has withstood the impact of a B-25 bomber...which also had fuel, commentary is nil regarding its current structural soundness. This tells me that it remains a safe building. It is apparent that, given the limitations of the 1920's, it was designed quite well.
With a foggy day and the B-25 bomber in mind, the WTC was designed. I believe that, for a building, it is irrelevant whether fog is present or absent when it is directly hit by a plane. And it's a certainty that if a plane is in the air, it has fuel. You keep posting about the architects and designers anticipating flight impact and fog. Terrific! But do you mean to state also that, though these highly educated and intelligent architects and designers, who were anticipating and designing for the possibility of a jet aircraft collision with a tower near three of the busiest airports in the world (JFK, Newark, and La Guardia), who anticipated and designed for the possibility of the impact of SEVERAL 707's due to fog.........but were unable to conceive that the plane(s) would have fuel, possibly having just taken off from JFK, Newark, and/or La Guardia? Come on....let's give some credit to the designers instead of .gov's fairy tales!
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 336,000 pounds.
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 767-200ER is 395,000 pounds.
The wingspan of a Boeing 707 is 146 feet.
The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet.
The length of a Boeing 707 is 153 feet.
The length of a Boeing 767 is 159 feet.
The Boeing 707 could carry 23,000 gallons of fuel.
The Boeing 767 could carry 23,980 gallons of fuel.
The cruise speed of a Boeing 707 is 607 mph = 890 ft/s,
The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s.
The Boeing 707 and 767 are very similar aircraft, with the main differences
being that the 767 is slightly heavier and the 707 is faster.
Since the Boeing 707 had a higher thrust to weight ratio, it would be traveling
faster on take-off and on landing.
The thrust to weight ratio for a Boeing 707 is 4 x 18,000/336,000 = 0.214286.
The thrust to weight ratio for a Boeing 767 is 2 x 31,500/395,000 = 0.159494.
In all the likely variations of an accidental impact with the WTC, the Boeing
707 would be traveling faster. In terms of impact damage, this higher speed
would more than compensate for the slightly lower weight of the Boeing 707.
OK, you understand two masses are attracted by the force of gravity from each mass, right?
But what you fail to understand is that masses cannot go through other masses at the acceleration of gravity. There is a collision involved which results in the opposite force of gravity. This results in a significant slowing of the attracting masses. Even a reversal of direction of the attracting masses is possible if the collision is powerful enough.
A real pancaking of the WTC towers could not occur in 15 seconds due to the collisions at each floor. Also the collisions of the floors alone would not make the core columns collapse. They were holding the floors up, so without their weight they would have even been stronger rather than weaker to continue standing.
Someone offered the owner $3 million for him after that race and the owner rejected it when common sense tells one to go for the bucks.
It was an impressive victory. I didn't see it coming over one of the derby favorites, Old Fashioned. But when I saw the name and the winning price, $115.00, I thought that I wish I gave you that tip.
But what you fail to understand is that masses cannot go through other masses at the acceleration of gravity
Did you see what I posted above? The WTC was not a solid object falling though another solid object. Also, what you fail to take into account is that resistance may SLOW the collapse but it is not going to make it DECREASE in speed as it is collapsing unless the mass of the resistance somehow becomes greater than the force of the collapse. So, gravity is still going to increase the speed of the collapse UNLESS the resistance is GREATER than the velocity of the falling body.
Do you agree that as the Tower collapses the velocity of the falling body increased?
They were holding the floors up
Uh no...trusses [as opposed to I-beams, as it would be in a steel framed building], which were attached to the core and the outer support, were holding the floors up. ON top of the trusses was concrete floor.
Do you think the WTC Towers were immune to controlled demolition?
Of course not.
But you want me believe that they were immune to a catastrophic impact and explosion and then fires.
Again, my question is why vbother with the impact? Blow up the buildings with a CD and blame Iraq. If you beleive that the American people are so gullible then why would you believe that they couldn't fall for that as well?
Do you think the WTC Towers were immune to controlled demolition?
Of course not.
But you want me believe that they were immune to a catastrophic impact and explosion and then fires.
Again, my question is why vbother with the impact? Blow up the buildings with a CD and blame Iraq. If you beleive that the American people are so gullible then why would you believe that they couldn't fall for that as well?
But do you mean to state also that, though these highly educated and intelligent architects and designers, who were anticipating and designing for the possibility of a jet aircraft collision with a tower near three of the busiest airports in the world (JFK, Newark, and La Guardia), who anticipated and designed for the possibility of the impact of SEVERAL 707's due to fog.........but were unable to conceive that the plane(s) would have fuel, possibly having just taken off from JFK, Newark, and/or La Guardia? Come on....let's give some credit to the designers instead of .gov's fairy tales!
They couldn't have accounted for the Magickal Jet Fuel™ because no one knew anything about that when they designed and built the towers. >(;^{]
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
#444. To: litus, TwentyTwelve, RickyJ, Former Lurker (#441)
Re-examine your blind trust in a .gov that has shown itself to be duplicitous and unconcerned about the people of this country.
This is where you lose any sense of the rational. I have taken each and every bit of your theories and conclusions and researched them. It isn't as if this is the first time I've seen this stuff. I have close to 100 bookmarks on my work computr alone and in those bookmarks are links to pages that could be bookmarked. You folks have a lot of problems, not the least of which are pathological, but even putting them aside, your conclisions are not supported by facts.
All of you have posted quesitons to me which I have answered and sourced. Not one of you have responded to any of the questions that I have posed to you. How could you be so certain of your conclusions when you are so unopen to questions about them? You're as bad as the God freaks demanding that I have FAITH in that which I cannot see. But worse...I know that no man can show me God while YOU most certainly CAN show why you believe as you do. The problem is you don't which leads me to one conclusion and it's that you cannot...there is not one quesiton that you raise about that day that either cannot be answered or doesn't have a faulty premise at its root.
Some of you have posted some of the most absurd claims, e.g., the plane did not explode INSIDE the WTC...the outside was relatively undamaged...no manifest with Arab names was ever published [when one was] and the coup de gras, the WTC Towers were built to withsatnd an explosion but it was an explosion that brought them down...
Why not trying to answer the easiest question of all. Why use the planes? Why only kill 3K? Why use Afghanistan as a means of getting Itaq when Iraq was already a convenient target?
A sense of the rational is lost whenever an argument is made that anything issuing from an illegitimate government is legitimate. The 9/11 narrative as told by FedGovCorpInc and its various media is stinkier than week old pork left in the sun.
Still waiting on your explanation for Satam Al Suqami's passport.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself.
Oh, so all those steel columns in the core and the cement surrounding them can just "implode", eh? And the floors, well, they are just about as thin as paper, right? Right. The towers certainly didn't implode for anyone who has watched the collapse on video.
Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure.
Did you ever take physics? When an object's equilibrium changes due to a change in the forces acting upon it, it moves in a direction with a net force in the direction of that vector. If a corner of the supporting structure had collapsed, as is apparent in the tilted position seen in the beginning of the collapse I had shown, then its center of gravity DOES change. The fact that the SIDE of the structure is pointing at a DOWNWARDS angle indicates that the force of gravity is exerting a net force on the SIDE of the structure which causes a LATERAL force vector to be applied to that object, in this case the top of the WTC which is leaning over.
Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity.
There is no reason there SHOULD have been a near free-fall collapse. Of course, with explosives in the floors BELOW the damaged floors, the top of the tower would have just dropped like a rock, exactly as it did.
"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
"If you follow the money, you can see that the people with the most to gain occupied the key military and civilian positions to help 9/11 happen, as well as to cover up the crime. Such is the hallmark of false flag operations throughout history.
"But the incredible scale of the 9/11 sham, and the sheer number of people who still refuse to see the mountain of truth in front of their eyes...that's what makes the September 11, 2001 attacks the greatest false flag operation of all time.
"Hermann Göring stated: "Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
"Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf, a book still forbidden in some countries (such as France), wrote: "In the size of the lie there is always contained a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people...will more easily fall victim to a great lie than to a small one."
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
Are you trying to tell me that there was more than one center of gravity on one structure?
You even said it yourself, that the top of the tower had a different center of gravity from the rest of the structure when it broke off and started to lean.
Or did you forget that?
"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
#451. To: TwentyTwelve war, litus, RickyJ, Former Lurker, Rotara, wudidiz (#445)
< Why use the planes?
Psychological impact.
Emotional impact.
Terror.
American outrage.
Also misdirection. Like a stage magician drawing the audiences attention to the moving hand. The planes acted to draw people's attention away from the other things going on - such as demolition charges going off. It also gave them a ready made cover story, however implausible, as to why the buildings collapsed. Then by sticking to the big lie enough of the sucker class would buy it - and some still do.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
Actually when it was attached ot the building it did not as the structure had a center of gravity. when that support broke the top established its own.
That's basic geometry bro...
Did you forget your own words that you wrote shortly before questioning me about two centers of gravity?
"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
So war, do you admit you posted a picture of building 5 and tried to pass it off as a picture of building 7? Yep, that building 5 sure did burn didn't it. BTW, it didn't collapse did it...
"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
A real pancaking of the WTC towers could not occur in 15 seconds due to the collisions at each floor. Also the collisions of the floors alone would not make the core columns collapse. They were holding the floors up, so without their weight they would have even been stronger rather than weaker to continue standing.
I've noticed war likes to evade those sorts of facts.
"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
"You're either with US or you're with the illegal shadow government !"
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#456. To: war, litus, TwentyTwelve, RickyJ, Former Lurker, bluegrass (#444)
This is where you lose any sense of the rational. I have taken each and every bit of your theories and conclusions and researched them. It isn't as if this is the first time I've seen this stuff. I have close to 100 bookmarks on my work computr alone and in those bookmarks are links to pages that could be bookmarked. You folks have a lot of problems, not the least of which are pathological, but even putting them aside, your conclisions are not supported by facts.
All of you have posted quesitons to me which I have answered and sourced. Not one of you have responded to any of the questions that I have posed to you. ...
Nonsense. You have linked to derivative apologias - such as the drawings you tried to misrepresent as the passenger manifests. No, the Passenger Manifests are the Passenger Manifests as released by the Airlines in the 24 hours following the Op. None of those ORIGINAL Passenger Manifests show any Arabic names.
When presented with a datum you cannot refute you go off on another diversionary tangent and then cite things not said by anyone on this thread as proof that people seeking the truth are are all nuts for doing so. Your tactic is dishonest and is logically false.
Here again you concoct an irrational and logically invalid hodgepodge and then attribute it to ALL when ALL have not made ALL of the claims you falsely attempt to attribute to them. Again you are using a dishonest disinformation tactic to smear not refute:
Some of you have posted some of the most absurd claims, e.g., the plane did not explode INSIDE the WTC...the outside was relatively undamaged...no manifest with Arab names was ever published [when one was] and the coup de gras, the WTC Towers were built to withsatnd an explosion but it was an explosion that brought them down...
Some has a name. SOME is NOT ALL.
The WTC Towers were built to withstand an aircraft impact and yet you assert that two aircraft impacts brought down 3 buildings.
Further your assertion is again false as you assert the buildings were built to withstand an explosion but all things engineering have a scale and a tolerance. When you exceed the structures tolerance you exceed its capacity to remain standing. No, what you have done is presented argument that really says nothing while, falsely, asserting and acting as though it proves something.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
"You're either with US or you're with the illegal shadow government !"
Exactly. At this point I think we can gauge "war's" true colors, and they ain't Red, White, and Blue. More like just plain Red.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
I've noticed war likes to evade those sorts of facts.
Had you bothered to read any of the information that I posted both the time and the reasons were posted and they are far more plausible than believing that seemingly silent charges were placed along the entirity of the 1400+ feet of the core and "bathtub" and then a plane was rammed into it to distract.
So only in your mind have I evaded those...but it does underscore what I have been saying all along...you folks don't want me toanswer your questoins.
#459. To: war, FormerLurker, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, tom007, litus, bluegrass, all (#458)
Once again evasion, dissembling, and distortion.
Charges would not need to be put along the entire core, which previously you tried to deny existed as the primary structural support of the towers, but only at enough points to collapse the structure under the gravity load. As well you ignore and sidestep the eyewitness testimony of people in the buildings, and first responders, who reported explosions going off.
To collapse the structure you need only sever the primary support members, the core, at key points.
No, all you are really trying to do is throw up confusion to divert from the key points - all of which you are busy evading.
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
Funny that you consider the structural engineer an apologist.
Funny that you can "impeach" all of my sources as apologias when you can't link any of them directly to the government report.
Funny that you can avoid every quesiton that has been posed by me about your beliefs by waving your magic Moonbat Wand and proclaim them moot.
The WTC Towers were built to withstand an aircraft impact and yet you assert that two aircraft impacts brought down 3 buildings.
That is NOT what I assert and I have corrected this several times over. It was the combination of the damage of the planes' impact, the damage from the planes' exploding and the resultant fires that brought the towers down.
Further your assertion is again false as you assert the buildings were built to withstand an explosion but all things engineering have a scale and a tolerance. When you exceed the structures tolerance you exceed its capacity to remain standing. No, what you have done is presented argument that really says nothing while, falsely, asserting and acting as though it proves something.
I am sure that there is a cogent thought in there somewhere yearning to be set free...
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
No one spends this much time posting on a topic unless they really believe it or are paid to do so. I do not believe war really believes the government theory, so I would highly suspect we have a paid government spammer among us.
Intelligence agencies are always looking to befriend people already established in a group, such as war is on liberty post and here, and then entice them to spy for them. They tried to get some Ron Paul supporters at the Rally for the Republic to do it too, they told them where to go. :)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
How are you this paranoid and not dead by your own hand?
I was at the Rally for the Republic. Believe me, I know government agencies tried to, and probably did penetrate several Ron Paul support groups. One guy was so upset they asked him to do it he was a basket case thinking what might happen to him if told them no. Still he told them no.
No one spends this much time posting on a topic unless they really believe it or are paid to do so. I do not believe war really believes the government theory, so I would highly suspect we have a paid government spammer among us.
So it would appear. war is too intelligent to believe the government theory given all the contrary evidence.
So far I've just been watching and mostly biding my time watching the tactics he employs and how he employs them. I don't have as much time to post as I used to so I have to be a bit more selective.
You can find the tactics he employs all listed here:
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil 2. Become incredulous and indignant 3. Create rumor mongers 4. Use a straw man 5. Sidetrack opponents w name calling, ridicule 6. Hit and Run 7. Question motives 8. Invoke authority 9. Play Dumb 10. Associate opponent charges with old news 11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions 12. Enigmas have no solution 13. Alice in Wonderland Logic 14. Demand complete solutions 15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions 16. Vanish evidence and witnesses 17. Change the subject 18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad 19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs 20. False evidence 21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor 22. Manufacture a new truth 23. Create bigger distractions 24. Silence critics 25. Vanish
""I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology...It's importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda...Although this science will be diligently studied, it will be rigidly confined to the governing class. The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated." Bertrand Russel, Eugenicist and Logician
#478. To: Original_Intent, TwentyTwelve war, RickyJ, Former Lurker, Rotara, wudidiz (#451)
The planes acted to draw people's attention away from the other things going on - such as demolition charges going off. It also gave them a ready made cover story, however implausible, as to why the buildings collapsed. Then by sticking to the big lie enough of the sucker class would buy it - and some still do.
I know that no man can show me God while YOU most certainly CAN show why you believe as you do. The problem is you don't which leads me to one conclusion and it's that you cannot...there is not one quesiton that you raise about that day that either cannot be answered or doesn't have a faulty premise at its root.
You are mistaken.
Your are absolutely able to have as much faith in God as you do what you believe and hold on to be true about .gov having absolutely not participated or enable, either through commission or omission, in the events leading up to, occurring, and subsequent to, 9/11.
For nearly each and every one of your defenses, there are things that don't add up. There are coincidences too great in number to be dismissed. To believe the government story, without question, requires the type of suspension of disbelief that is required when reading fiction.
Furthermore, beyond the suspension of disbelief with which you cling, you assign a characterization to these men in office, elected or otherwise, that is akin to that which a parishoner would hold for their minister, yet these men are found, time and again, to be nothing but power hungry greedy sob's, who have evidenced a callous disregard to the people of this country and the rule of law. They are empty shirts, liars, deceivers, swindlers, and con man, who seek nothing other than enriching themselves off the taxpayers backs, though they were elected to office to serve the people.
It is these kinds of people whom you trust and believe when they issue statements, have secret meetings, hold shoddy hearings, which are nothing but dog and pony shows, over and over again.
#480. To: Artisan, Christine, Jethro Tull, Itistoolate, Diana, All (#0)
any debunkers?
I've looked at these issues with total disgust. You're seeing a "re-creation" which can be anything that the program operator wants it to be. The major question being, "Okay, where's the original computer data, from which these images were created???"
I've never discovered anything valid which denies that the Tower hits were anything but as valid as what we saw on the news of 9-11. The give-away of the truth of the Twin Towers is the difficulty of the last-second maneuvering of both aircraft; as those buildings become a really difficult target to hit, at those kinds of flying speeds. That also tells a professional pilot that there were no idiots at the controls of those aircraft - and that the strikes were hand-flown; at least in the last seconds. The 'mystery' being in the identity/nationality of the actual pros who did that flying. Who else has a cause worth dying for (It wasn't Islam!)
#482. To: RickyJ, Coral Snake, Christine, Jethro Tull, Itistoolate, Diana, All (#481)
With a camera mounted in the plane I don't see why a pilot on the ground couldn't have done it.
I've hand-flown that generation of aircraft into 'tight' airports such as Burbank & Orange County. With landing gear down, & full flaps at 150 mph, it's tough enough to hit the landing zone; at that speed. Take the speed up to 300 knots & no remote control pilot could do it. Add that no such camera would go undetected by maintenance or the pilots.
Add that the pilots would have to be done-in, to preclude their override of any "remote control." The "remote control" debate fails the smell-test, from the very beginning.
What if it was more like a guided missile system? Computers and lasers and all that? It seems hard to believe that it couldn't be done.
"If I were going to construct a God I would furnish him with some ways and qualities and characteristics which the Present One lacks... He would spend some of His eternities in trying to forgive Himself for making man unhappy when He could have made him happy with the same effort and He would spend the rest of them in studying astronomy." ~ Mark Twain
#484. To: wudidiz, Christine, Jethro Tull, All (#483)
What if it was more like a guided missile system? Computers and lasers and all that? It seems hard to believe that it couldn't be done.
There is no doubt that the technology has been available since the 60s. BUT, you can't get by the issue of maintenance (observing the alteration of the electronics), the pilots & cabin crew. There's the rub.
Trust me, I've looked at that angle very closely. It's well worth considering, but too quickly fails the probability test.
There are plenty of "possibilities," but most are quick to be excluded, by the industry professionals - if they have the guts to speak out; and that's a really small number.
Thank you. Then I think that somehow the maintenance would be overlooked. Maybe they switched the planes? Maybe the pilots were coerced? Done in? Etc...
I do trust you. I'm just trying to understand how it was done.
I guess because I don't believe Arab hijackers were on board.
"If I were going to construct a God I would furnish him with some ways and qualities and characteristics which the Present One lacks... He would spend some of His eternities in trying to forgive Himself for making man unhappy when He could have made him happy with the same effort and He would spend the rest of them in studying astronomy." ~ Mark Twain
I know you are new to posting here, we went though this some time ago with BAC. If you do a search, you can find huge threads with all the real info needed. Sky, myself and numerous others posted tons and tons of info destroying the FEDS theory on 911.
Everything about WTC 1-2 collapse according to the official NIST Report rests on one unproven scenario only, that ALL the SFRM/fireproofing was blown or removed from the impact floors by the aircraft.
Not some of it, but all. This figure is around 80,000 sq feet.
The whole NIST Report is ridiculous.
Mark
If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
For nearly each and every one of your defenses, there are things that don't add up. There are coincidences too great in number to be dismissed.
Yet, oddly, you have been unable to point these out and offer any kind of TANGBIBLE evidence to the contrary...in other words, you're relying on your SAY SO.
Everything about WTC 1-2 collapse according to the official NIST Report rests on one unproven scenario only, that ALL the SFRM/fireproofing was blown or removed from the impact floors by the aircraft.
Not some of it, but all. This figure is around 80,000 sq feet.
The whole NIST Report is ridiculous.
That's was another point upon which their story hinges. Yet another preposterous requirement. "ALL" the fireproofing....
The absurdities of their story.........it takes more faith, imo, to believe them than it does to believe that God exists and fashioned all creation, in whatever "way" He chose to do it....
*shaking head*
Thanks for the information about other threads...I'll look them up.
Nope; I'm relying upon those who don't have a vested interest in covering up for .gov fiction...and have come to contrary conclusions, based upon the same "evidence".......which YOU disbelieve and which YOU dismiss.
parts one two and three disprove the government theory with high school physics and real numbers
Even in a best case scenario with all condiditons favorable to the government theory (none of which were present), it would have taken at least 44 seconds to collapse, if it were possible.
The laws of probability to do not support this happening to three buildings in precisely the same manner. In fact, it is a statistical impossibility, as was not one, but four ex-military airline crews allowing themselves to be overcome without even squawking the hijack transponder code.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
Acting as "too bad" for his calculations is the simple fact that not all of the floors below the top block are intact so his calcluations of the initial accleleration and resitance is flawed.
You haven't PRESENTED any evidence. You CLAIM that all was brought down by controlled demolitions. Given how the Towers collapsed, at the least YOU have to be able to show exactly WHERE those charges were set. Not to mention WHEN they were set and not to mention who, what, and from where those charges were activated.
Starkly missing from this thread is EXACTLY how this "plot" was executed.
Take the speed up to 300 knots & no remote control pilot could do it. Add that no such camera would go undetected by maintenance or the pilots.
Add that the pilots would have to be done-in, to preclude their override of any "remote control." The "remote control" debate fails the smell-test, from the very beginning.
You're assuming that the government's bag of equipment contains the same equipment you can buy off the shelf. Of course they would have technology MUCH more sophisticated than anything publicly available, and it would CLASSIFIED so neither you nor anyone else would know what feats could be performed using THEIR remote control equipment.
Needless to say, if a cruise missile can hit its target, so can a larger and slower aircraft.
As far as the maintenance crew, who's to say the crew wasn't infiltrated by black ops? And who knows how well the government could conceal a device if they really wanted 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
wait a minute. from my understanding this newly-found clip and those posting it simply purport not that planes didnt hit the towers, but that the planes were perhaps different planes than the originals which the govt claims hit the buildings.
I did not know you did not believe that the planes were remote controlled. I repsect your opinion which is why i asked.
so you are saying that you believe that there had to be real pilots flying the planes but that they were not arab boogeyman? who the heck were they then? some neocons with a zeal for empire? i dont know if that sounds plausible??
thanks for the reply.
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. "I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him" George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
Take the speed up to 300 knots & no remote control pilot could do it. Add that no such camera would go undetected by maintenance or the pilots.
Which is why computer guidance systems are now used. I'm not sure anyone expects a real pilot to be remotely controlling these planes. Think guidance system as in missiles. Just a thought ..
All I know is I couldn't have pulled this off and I don't think cave dwelling Cessna pilots could either.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
Needless to say, if a cruise missile can hit its target, so can a larger and slower aircraft.
As far as the maintenance crew, who's to say the crew wasn't infiltrated by black ops? And who knows how well the government could conceal a device if they really wanted to...
There may have been no crew at all, no passengers, just a military jet plane guided using the latest missile guiding technology to hit the WTC buildings. At 550 MPH that would be a piece of cake with our current technology.
I watched the second plane go in and I a) knew it was UAL and b) was pretty sure it was a 767 b ut I did have some question that it might have been a 737...
Your other problem is that the second flight has been captured on several videos and yet another problem you have is the recorded conversation between the AA 11's flight attendent and AA's ground ops.
I watched the second plane go in and I a) knew it was UAL
You knew no such thing. You only know what you saw, you have no way of knowing what plane that really was despite markings on it. It would be very easy to put a United logo on a military plane.
You CLAIM that all was brought down by controlled demolitions.
No, I have not. I have stated nothing of the kind.
I go along with the real possibility that CHARGES were set, however, with the intent to bring the towers down........not that it, alone, brought it down. I believe other factors were likely present that enabled that.
Given how the Towers collapsed, at the least YOU have to be able to show exactly WHERE those charges were set. Not to mention WHEN they were set and not to mention who, what, and from where those charges were activated.
Prior to a prosecutor presenting evidence before a court of law, they first begin by analyzing and reviewing facts, data, and the evidence before them which leads them to certain conclusions.
The types of evidence they have is either direct and/or circumstantial.
"Direct evidence is evidence of a fact based on a witness's personal knowledge or observation of that fact. A person's guilt of a charged crime may be proven by direct evidence if, standing alone, that evidence satisfies a jury beyond a reasonable doubt of the person's guilt of that crime.
Circumstantial evidence is direct evidence of a fact from which a person may reasonably infer the existence or non- existence of another fact. A person's guilt of a charged crime may be proven by circumstantial evidence, if that evidence, while not directly establishing guilt, gives rise to an inference of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The law draws no distinction between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence in terms of weight or importance. Either type of evidence may be enough to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, depending on the facts of the case as the jury finds them to be.
In the instant case, there appears to be both direct and circumstantial evidence that can easily refute the claims put forth by .gov. Also in the instant case, it is .gov that is and has been withholding information and/or obstructing the flow of information, to those outside the government. Therefore, the scenario is akin to the fox watching the henhouse. This does not lead to believing statements and proclamations made by the fox. There has been no independent investigations.
I firmly believe in allowing others' good work and statements speak for myself, rather than reinventing the wheel. Therefore, the following, in part, adequately addresses and sums up only part of the problems with .gov's "investigations" and conclusions on this matter:
6. All formal investigations have started with the premise that the "official story" presents an accurate, objective outline of relevant events on and preceding 9/11. This is assumed to be the case despite the rapid accumulation of evidence that the official accounts (some of which contradict each other) cannot possibly explain the events as they transpired. The effect of this unwarranted presumption has been to exclude critical lines of inquiry and bodies of evidence from the outset.
7. The FEMA investigation of the building collapses drew no meaningful conclusions. The subsequent investigation by NIST began with an open call for video and photographic evidence, because the relevant physical evidence (e.g., steel beams from the collapse zones) had already been scrapped.
8. Extensive and crucial sections of the Kean Commission's findings and consequent conclusions are based on uncorroborated interrogation reports channeled from captive government suspects. Examples include Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Binalshibh, and Abu Zubaydah, who were never made available for questioning by the commissioners, staff, or any Kean Commission representative.
The following is a good summary of the difficulties, governmental obstruction, and/or problems which have caused citizens the inability to better investigate, and thereby, be able to hold government to account for its malfeasance, suppression of information, or answering any kind of interrogatories:
Tools available to citizens have not worked or are not sufficient to the requirements of getting at key facts in this complex case:
a. Citizens lack subpoena enforcement power.
b. The Administration generally is not honoring Freedom of Information Act requests. For example, the Justice Department chose to go to court rather than honor Sibel Edmonds' lawful, successful FOIA request.
c. The Justice Department and FBI contend that key evidence sought by plaintiffs is either covered by the National Security Act and constitutes a related body of state secrets or must remain confidential due to ongoing cases and investigations.22 In the case of Sibel Edmonds, they have engaged in highly unusual after-the-fact classification of public testimony.
d. Critical evidence has been destroyed.23 Recordings of Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") controllers' accounts of September 11 events taped immediately after the attacks were later meticulously cut to shreds and thrown away, despite orders to save them for investigative reference (New York Times, 5/6/04). CIA and Congressional staff complained that the National Security Agency was needlessly destroying evidence related to US companies and citizens that could "perhaps redirect" the investigation (Boston Globe, 10/27/01). The editor of the nation's oldest firefighting magazine, Bill Manning, objected to the accelerated scrapping of World Trade Center rubble before investigators could determine the actual mechanics of the building collapse (Fire Engineering, 1/02) and in an angry editorial, called the government's
investigation "a half-baked farce." At the end of October, 2004, a firefighter with the New York Fire Department as well as a Ground Zero recovery worker came forward to claim that the three of the four "black boxes" from the aircraft at Ground Zero were found during the clean-up work (Philadelphia Daily News, 10/28/04), contrary to the government's longstanding assertion that no trace of these devices was ever discovered, which assertion was reiterated in The 9/11 Commission Report (Ch. 1, fn. 76, p. 468). A full investigation would pursue this claim and locate this vital evidence of the attacks, if it still exists.
e. Many of the aforementioned acts, coupled with the rapid confiscation and top-secret classification of other important evidence, suggest at best a blatant contempt for the normal prerequisites to a truthful and confidence-inspiring inquiry and at worst obstruction of justice. Such behavior inevitably undermines trust in government in related matters, such as the veracity of uncorroborated "confessions" from alleged 9/11 conspirators held at undisclosed locations for well over a year in some cases without formal charges being brought against them for the 9/11 murders. [i.e., Ramzi Binalshibh, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah.]
f. Whistleblowers and elected officials who have called attention to these matters have been ignored, ridiculed, fired, threatened, subjected to gag orders, and harassed.24 We draw your attention in particular to the cases of Sibel Edmonds, Behrouz Sarshar, Robert Wright, Indira Singh, US Air Force Col. Steve Butler, and Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA). Such examples coincide with legal changes under the USA PATRIOT Act and other statutes and regulations, excessive classification orders, and constant invocation of a state of threat in the homeland. These factors have a powerful silencing effect on others who would come forward.
g. Officials and military officers associated with the "failures" of investigation and defense response have not been held accountable; on the contrary, several of them have been confirmed in elevated positions, given awards or promoted following September 11. We draw your attention in particular to the cases of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Richard Myers, Gen. Ralph Eberhart (Commander of NORAD on 9/11/01), Brig. Gen. Montague Winfield (director of the National Military Command Center), FBI officials David Frasca, Marion Bowman, Michael Maltbie and an unnamed FBI official alleged to have tolerated penetration by foreign agents at the Bureau's translations department (CBS News, 8/8/04).
h. In the Swiss Re suit against Larry Silverstein, the owner of World Trade Center Building 7 and of a 99-year lease on the entire World Trade Center complex, the insurance company's motions for access to foreign conspirators' statements (obtained by the Kean Commission) were denied.
i. Members of the major media clearly have been afraid and/or loath to examine the contradictions and anomalies implicit in the Administration's official 9/11 story.25
Sensational, simplistic and relentless coverage of the attacks and ensuing wars based on the official narrative also proved so profitable for media news divisions that we may never see any serious skeptical investigation into its truth or legitimacy. Members of the mainstream press, by and large, have failed to note ample evidence of cover-ups relating to September 11, question official accounts like The 9/11 Commission Report despite its obvious omissions, distortions, and inconsistencies, pursue the unanswered questions and bodies of evidence cited in Part II of this Complaint and Petition, or even report on the stunning findings of the 9/11 Zogby Poll.
j. Congress also has abdicated its responsibility to provide full oversight, conduct exhaustive investigations, provide a credible accounting or even hold in-depth hearings into the most important lines of inquiry put forward by the 9/11 Family Steering Committee. Congress has failed to examine the Kean Commision's questionable "findings of fact and circumstances" on which were based some of the most far-reaching reform recommendations ever proposed in US legislation. Nor has it pursued demands made by Minnesota Senator Mark Dayton for an investigation into NORAD's representations regarding air defense issues.
k. The CIA has yet to release an internal report, based upon two years of work, on the September 11 events, which apparently attributes individual accountability for particular failures. The document was withheld until after the November 2, 2004 election and is still being withheld today, amid reports that the new CIA director, Porter Goss, wishes to remove sections "drawing conclusions about whether individual CIA officers should be held accountable for any failures" before releasing the report to the public (New York Times, 11/2/04). This is further indication that possible negligence or complicity on the part of individual officials is being hidden from public and Congressional scrutiny.
l. The Justice Department also continues, months after its completion, to suppress "one last chapter" of the The 9/11 Commission Report, which reportedly deals with the "broadly inaccurate accounts provided by several civil and military officials about efforts to track and chase the hijacked aircraft on Sept. 11." (New York Times, 10/30/04). This action, if it occurred, provides further documentation of the US government's overall pattern of suppressing evidence pointing to individual accountability. An independent criminal
investigation or impartial grand jury is therefore the only discernible source of redress remaining to the People.
If .gov has nothing to hide, and if their story isn't fantastical fiction, there should have been criminal investigations, people should be in jail, information more forthcoming, independent investigations should have been welcomed, and the evidence it presented in the dog and pony show 9/11 Commission, more compelling. However, it is not; .gov has failed. The result: at least 1/3 of all Americans disbelieve its conclusions and statements, despite the fact that the media has excelled at supporting the .gov propaganda.
Your other problem is that the second flight has been captured on several videos and yet another problem you have is the recorded conversation between the AA 11's flight attendent and AA's ground ops.
All very easy to manufacture with voice technology. They can get Osama to say what ever they want him to say, just as they can anyone else.
Your problem is that 9/11 truth is coming out and government stooges will not have an easy life.
All very easy to manufacture with voice technology...
Dude...are you really this much of a fucking moron? Why would you respond with unsourced, paraonoia based stupidity knowing that you were going to get resoundingly bitch slapped? Stick to what you can prove not what you ***think***.
Your problem is that 9/11 truth is coming out
Hardly apparent from anything you Bats have posted on this thread.
In the instant case, there appears to be both direct and circumstantial evidence that can easily refute the claims put forth by .gov. Also in the instant case, it is .gov that is and has been withholding information and/or obstructing the flow of information, to those outside the government. Therefore, the scenario is akin to the fox watching the henhouse. This does not lead to believing statements and proclamations made by the fox. There has [sic] been no independent investigations.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
In the instant case, there appears to be both direct and circumstantial evidence that can easily refute the claims put forth by .gov. Also in the instant case, it is .gov that is and has been withholding information and/or obstructing the flow of information, to those outside the government. Therefore, the scenario is akin to the fox watching the henhouse. This does not lead to believing statements and proclamations made by the fox. There has [sic] been no independent investigations.
More babble...says you with no proof.
Prove that otherwise.
Wha...huh? You want me to prove a negative?
ROFLMAO...
yeah. Quite hilarious how you distract, distort, obfuscate, and lie.
You saw what appeared to be a UAL plane hit a WTC tower. That is different from KNOWING it was a UAL plane. You claimed you knew it was a UAL plane. Your eye witness testimony from the ground is NOT proof of ANYTHING.
youe've yet to show where I have distracted, distorted, obsfuscated and lied.
I'm not going to bother with the rest of your post; it's not worth my time.
However, as to your lie, the following serves as just one example:
You CLAIM that all was brought down by controlled demolitions.
My posting history on this forum is quite limited; my posting on this subject in this forum, even moreso...as a matter of fact, it's limited to just this thread. Yet, you state I made a claim I never uttered. That is a lie, but more than that, it is also a distortion and exaggeration. You were already once corrected on this.
Claims that the WTC was designed to take the full speed impact of a 707.
Regardless whether they were designed for that or not, they did take full seed impacts from jet airplanes and stood with no problems until they blew them up.
War is probably a spook. This forum is quite famous among them, even though it is much smaller than some other sites because they know the average IQ here is about 147. That makes us a threat imo.
The next time you see some website advertising a "new continental congress" or some such crap asking you to join, rest assured it is a CIA name gathering tool.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
My posting history on this forum is quite limited; my posting on this subject in this forum, even moreso...as a matter of fact, it's limited to just this thread.
Lie.
9/11 UAL 175 Plane on Radar AFTER It Has 'Crashed' Into The WTC; (MSNBC) (#479) [Full Thread] Post Date: 2009-03-21 00:22:14 From: litus To: war
War thinks the WTC towers were not steel framed. I kid you not! (#24) [Full Thread] Post Date: 2009-03-20 13:03:35 From: litus To: war
~snip~
As for your protestations regarding me characterizing you as a supporter of controlled demolition, you gave 0 choice once you reject the fact that a plane's impact and the ensuing explosion and fires caused a catastrophica failure of the buildings load bearing capabilities, it's all you have left.
As for you claiming that I've lied...feel free to post a link to thwere I claimed this:
Anyways........now we're back to fuel that caused it.........that MAGIKAL fuel!!
litus posted on 2009-03-18 22:14:41 ET (1 image) Reply Trace Private Reply
The next time you see some website advertising a "new continental congress" or some such crap asking you to join, rest assured it is a CIA name gathering tool.
Unfortunately I think the Campaign for Liberty that Ron Paul started is one as well.
If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
#530. To: Artisan, Christine, Jethro Tull, It istoolate, All (#498)
so you are saying that you believe that there had to be real pilots flying the planes but that they were not arab boogeyman? who the heck were they then? some neocons with a zeal for empire? i dont know if that sounds plausible??
There are a handful of viable possibilities available. If the aircraft was "remote controlled," the pilots would have the ability to either override the electronics, or at least radio that they were in dire peril, via radio, or the transponder. That pretty well rules out the "remote control" idea. It can be debated all day long, but those such as myself are qualified to cite the impossible and absurd. I keep an open mind, but there hasn't been that much viable material to speak in support of the detractor theories. Passionate nonsense & rationalization doesn't manufacture truth.
One possibility is the hand-picking of at least four black-ops pilots, willing to commit suicide. We'll probably never know.
The most important issue is that the 'official' story is so full of holes, that it looks like a chotic gause bandage. Add the massive coverup by the government agencies, aided by the robotic media.
Only Israelis were warned of 9-11, the London & Jordianian bombings. As Netanyahu said - before 'correcting' himself, "911 is very good for Israel." Being reasonable & realistic; what can anyone make of all that?
Add the Mossad "Dancing Art Students," set up to film the twin tower strikes.
Has anyone else noticed that our great "Ally" Israel never contributed as much as a troop of Boy Scouts to serve coffee in the Afghan & Iraq war crime invasions/occupations. (They don't have to!)
AND - after being the primary beneficiary of the Geneva Conventions, why is Israel not a signatory to those Conventions? By virtue of their membership in the UN, they are technically a signatory to the Geneva Conventions & Nuremberg Precedents - but tell that to the Gazzans.
We live in a time where we must subjectively establish a highly reasonable possibility. Sometimes that comes from presented facts; sometimes from presented information, which can't possibly be true.
My advice on 9-11 is to get a copy of Dr. Ray Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor Revisited." He does quite an academic and surgical analysis of the 911 'official' accounts. I admit, I'm prejudiced on that work. I disagree with him on his conclusion that Flight 93 was shot down, but that's the only criticism I have of the book.
You could have blasted the ahit out of the core and the floors STILL would have had to have pancaked downward.
If the floors 'pancaked', then why was there no stack of floors at the bottom?
'Pancaked' Hahahaha
"If I were going to construct a God I would furnish him with some ways and qualities and characteristics which the Present One lacks... He would spend some of His eternities in trying to forgive Himself for making man unhappy when He could have made him happy with the same effort and He would spend the rest of them in studying astronomy." ~ Mark Twain
If the aircraft was "remote controlled," the pilots would have the ability to either override the electronics, or at least radio that they were in dire peril, via radio, or the transponder. That pretty well rules out the "remote control" idea.
How precisely can you make that claim? Do you know for a fact the systems weren't tampered with? How could you possibly say that with any semblence of certainty?
One possibility is the hand-picking of at least four black-ops pilots, willing to commit suicide.
That's a MUCH further stretch than the possibility of a hostile takeover of the flight systems by remote control.
"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
The NIST finding requires that the floor end connections held and that the sagging floors remained connected to the columns.
This is directly opposite of the speculation of FEMA
Thanks much for the link to that...I will read it through tomorrow when my brain is fresh. Interesting above quote...FEMA "speculation"...ain't that a dandy one?!
Tell me that you didn't just respond to me by saying: "Liar!!! I never posted that post about WTC on that other thread that I claimed I did not post but that both you and I have posted again here!!!!"
Sad the guy who believes that they built remote control redundancy into plane crash activated set charges and but doesn't understand the force/energy dynamic of a falling multi-ton structure on cement...
Another one who ***thinks*** that nothing exploded inside the building...even though he ***thinks*** that the charges were set to explode on impact...
No, they weren't set to explode on impact, but still some went off in the area, just not enough to compromise the structural integrity of the very well built structures the WTC towers were.
#559. To: SKYDRIFTER, Artisan, Christine, Jethro Tull, It istoolate, All (#530)
If the aircraft was "remote controlled," the pilots would have the ability to either override the electronics, or at least radio that they were in dire peril, via radio, or the transponder.
So you're saying that there is NO way someone with intimate knowledge of the aircraft systems could design a device to completely take over any and all systems, and that there would be no way to stop the pilot from isolating the problem and disabling the device?
"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
>> If the aircraft was "remote controlled," the pilots would have the ability to either override the electronics, or at least radio that they were in dire peril, via radio, or the transponder.
So you're saying that there is NO way someone with intimate knowledge of the aircraft systems could design a device to completely take over any and all systems, and that there would be no way to stop the pilot from isolating the problem and disabling the device?
Why does everyone assume that there even was a crew, or passengers?
This could have been a military plane disguised as a UAL plane.
I can't understand why SKYDRIFTER hasn't answered any of my questions here concerning his view of the possibility of remote control being used in the 9/11 attacks.
"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
Um...because people bought tickets and boarded the plane in Boston.
There's no evidence they boarded the planes, and I don't think there's any evidence they bought tickets either, but I could be mistaken. Why don't you post some links that prove they actually bought tickets.
As I said, there is NO proof that they actually boarded the planes, but you're more than welcome to look for it.
"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
Sad the guy who believes that they built remote control redundancy into plane crash activated set charges and but doesn't understand the force/energy dynamic of a falling multi-ton structure on cement...
Hey imbecile, check this out.
This is a bridge in Lebanon that was hit by missiles from Israeli jets. This bridge was much higher than the 1 floor distance in the WTC Towers. Still yet, even after falling hundreds of feet and having an actual missile hit it, it did NOT obliterate upon impact to fine dust. You might want to go back and check your physics book, you just screwed up big time. Thank god you are not a structural engineer. :)
Um...because people bought tickets and boarded the plane in Boston.
Yeah, that solves it then, why didn't I think of that?
They told us those planes hit the towers and those people were on the planes and no one has seen them since so that must mean those planes hit the WTC towers. <.sarcasm>
It must mean that only if you are using kindergarten logic. And you are not capable of much more than that.
I can't understand why SKYDRIFTER hasn't answered any of my questions here concerning his view of the possibility of remote control being used in the 9/11 attacks.
I don't know. I know he was a former commercial airline pilot, but why he thinks the actual planes taking off from Logan airport with passengers and crew on them hit the buildings is anybody's guess. All we have to go on is the word of the media and government and they have lied constantly about 9/11 so why would they tell the truth about the planes that really hit the towers?
Unless Skydrifter has some information we don't have then it is very strange of him to dismiss the missile guidance or remote control possibility on the planes that actually hit the WTC towers. So far he has not presented any information that would rule this out.
You surely don't think that the entire WTC structure above the impact zone fell straight down at once, do you? Not even the government's loony theory goes that far. The government's theory says one floor fell, which led to the next floor falling in a domino fashion. When they say a floor fell, they mean just the floor fell, not the entire structure above it. You really need to know what it is you are trying to defend before you start defending it.
You surely don't think that the entire WTC structure above the impact zone fell straight down at once
As is apparent from the videos it most certainly appeared to do so as it was the support [a combo of the trusses weakened by fire and the outer support walls bowing inward] below the level above the imapact zone that gave way thus allowing the top to fll as it was detached from the bottom.
Some of the "Troofers" try to fashion the fiction that because the below impact trusses failed that the top trusses had to fail too. Unfortunately for them [and you] there is no aspect of the WTC's engineering to support that contention.
As is apparent from the videos it most certainly appeared to do so as it was the support [a combo of the trusses weakened by fire and the outer support walls bowing inward] below the level above the imapact zone that gave way thus allowing the top to fll as it was detached from the bottom.
Oh, so that's what you think. Hmmm, that is a very far fetched theory to say the least, but at least you are honest about it.
Perhaps you could tell us about the coincidence of the crashed floors with respect to the upgrading of fireproofing
Oh, by the way, I have it that you like to troll.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. - Henry Louis Mencken
As is apparent from the videos it most certainly appeared to do so as it was the support [a combo of the trusses weakened by fire and the outer support walls bowing inward]
trusses weakened by fire? I thought that you said that fire wouldn't weaken steel? Or was it jet-a that wouldn't weaken steel, only that some office furnishings would weaken steel. Rather confusing.
Keep going with this trolling. It's amusing.
...outer support walls bowing inward...> Now that's a howl.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. - Henry Louis Mencken
You see, first the sagging floors sheered off the attaching bolts from the perimeter columns, but then that was proven false so those same magic wet noodle floors sagged and instead of sheering a couple of 5/8" bolts, they pulled in 1/2" walled box perimeter columns.
You see, first the sagging floors sheered off the attaching bolts from the perimeter columns, but then that was proven false so those same magic wet noodle floors sagged and instead of sheering a couple of 5/8" bolts, they pulled in 1/2" walled box perimeter columns.
Thems was mighty strong wet noodles.
Yeah, your right. MAGIC.
I'm still trying to get my mind around this MAGIC.
I'm also trying to figure out just who or what is AEROSPACEWEB.ORG that has not responded to emails for the past year, apparently cuz of the amount of email received.
Does anyone know Jeff Scott form 648 N Inyo St, Ridgecrest, CA?
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. - Henry Louis Mencken
#578. To: rack42, war, SneakyPete, and other coolaid drinkers (#577)
I'm still trying to get my mind around this MAGIC.
Not only did the wet noodle hold on tight and bend the perimeter columns, but it magically did it to every column simultaneously, in a building unevenly heated by fire, causing an equally magical symmetrical failure.
Not only did the wet noodle hold on tight and bend the perimeter columns, but it magically did it to every column simultaneously, in a building unevenly heated by fire, causing an equally magical symmetrical failure.
And it did all that to THREE different buildings in exactly the same manner. It's a miracle I tell ya'! (It's also a scientific and statistical impossibility)
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace
ALAS, BABYLON. It's over. Last one here turn out the lights.
Aerospaceweb.org Well this is interesting. This goes back to:
Registrant: Make this info private
American Institute of Aeronautics and Ast
1801 Alexander Bell Drive
Reston, VA 20191
US
Phone: (703) 264-7578
Fax: (703) 264-7551
Record expires on 28-Jul-2009
Record created on 17-Oct-2002
Database last updated on 02-Oct-2008
Follow the crumbs:
Setiawan, Syafrin
syafrins@AIAA.ORG
1801 Alexander Bell Drive
Ste 500
Reston, VA 20191 US
Phone: (703) 264-7578
Fax: (703) 264-7551
Record expires on 28-Jul-2009
Record created on 17-Oct-2002
Database last updated on 02-Oct-2008
Phone for Syafrin Setiawan gives: (703) 264-7578 Washington, VA What a surprise.
Syafrin Setiawan at Linked In" Network Admin at AIAA"
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. - Henry Louis Mencken
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#586. To: RickyJ, Former Lurker, Christine, Jethro Tull, Itistoolate, Diana, All (#560)
To: SKYDRIFTER, FormerLurker
>> If the aircraft was "remote controlled," the pilots would have the ability to either override the electronics, or at least radio that they were in dire peril, via radio, or the transponder. So you're saying that there is NO way someone with intimate knowledge of the aircraft systems could design a device to completely take over any and all systems, and that there would be no way to stop the pilot from isolating the problem and disabling the device?
Why does everyone assume that there even was a crew, or passengers?
This could have been a military plane disguised as a UAL plane.
The ability of the pilots to defeat any black-ops devices is unlimited, right down to shutting down the engines, so as to de-power the devices, then re- lighting the engines. Again, there would have been radio calls, transponder emergency/hijack settings, etc.
The video captures of the second strike are too real to be denied. Among other matters, to the trained eye of an airline pilot, a mistake in handling can be noted, along with the logical corrective response. To support that, an aerodynamically created vapor condensation shape takes place, right where it should.
Yes, we can all play the "...what if" game, all day long. In the end, nothing else fits.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even to the degree of "political athiesm." For better or worse, the dynamic final analysis goes to the function of consensus - which took us into two War Crime invasions & occupations; still ongoing.
What is the consensus of 9-11, today? Of late, I'm getting BS E-mail from disinformationists, using an E-mail list. The mission seems to say, "Don't even look toward the curtain; and DON'T you dare look behind it!" Fortunately, BAC, et al, trained me well. The key question is, why are the disinformationists re-surfacing? What's on the near horizon?
#587. To: FormerLurker, RickyJ, Christine, Jethro Tull, All (#563)
I can't understand why SKYDRIFTER hasn't answered any of my questions here concerning his view of the possibility of remote control being used in the 9/11 attacks.
My sincere apologies, I got distracted by other events.
The ability of the pilots to defeat any black-ops devices is unlimited, right down to shutting down the engines, so as to de-power the devices, then re- lighting the engines. Again, there would have been radio calls, transponder emergency/hijack settings, etc.
Ever consider the possibility that knockout gas was pumped into the cockpit? It's certainly WELL within the realm of possibilities.
"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
I don't think they were UAL planes at all. I think they were military remote control and/or laser guided planes with no one on board. The last second turn into the building doesn't mean there had to be an on board pilot. A pilot on the ground with a camera in the cockpit could have done the same thing remotely.
This operation was not going to rely on someone deciding to not kill themselves and crash the plane into the buildings. No, they had to make sure the planes hit the buildings and on board pilots would not have ensured that at all.
No, they had to make sure the planes hit the buildings and on board pilots would not have ensured that at all.
That is absolute fact.
"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
Heard it and saw the aftermath which was watching the glass on 26th Floor 1 Libtery being pelted with office debris and the wtc2 burning out of its South and East Faees...I said "I'm out of here we're under attack..." got down to the street and listened to fools opine that it was a freak accident...as I was getting ready to split for the day, I walked over to the Liberty Street side from the Cortland Street side...as I was approaching corner Church and Liberty #1 got hit...
Heard it and saw the aftermath which was watching the glass on 26th Floor 1 Libtery being pelted with office debris and the wtc2 burning out of its South and East Faees.
I wonder if he saw any of the Magickal Jet Fuel™. Guess not, it would have probably blinded anyone who saw it or scorched them to death from a thousand feet away.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
Your problem is that I know people who were in that building...who felt the impact explosion IN THE BUILDING...they didn't "hear it" outside the building.
Uh huh. They felt the IMPACT which SOUNDED like an explosion dumbass.
"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
As far as the FLIGHT MANIFESTS, well, go ahead and find them
I posted the one from the Boston Globe on 9/13, doof.
A newspaper graphic does not equal a flight manifest. Now, go find a link to the OFFICIAL flight manifests for the hijacked aircraft. I mean the flight manifests that the airlines use, not a pretty picture created by a graphic artist working for a newspaper who was given his information by a press release from Homeland Security.
"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
Your problem is that I know people who were in that building...who felt the impact explosion IN THE BUILDING...they didn't "hear it" outside the building.
Uh huh. They felt the IMPACT which SOUNDED like an explosion dumbass.
Yeah, he knows people that were in the building all right. Probably the same ones who placed the nano-thermite (US military grade super thermite, not easily made by your average cave man) in it.
That wouldn't surprise me in the least. Who knows, maybe his hands are dirtier than we think...
"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
#604. To: FormerLurker, RickyJ, Christine, Jethro Tull, All (#589)
Ever consider the possibility that knockout gas was pumped into the cockpit? It's certainly WELL within the realm of possibilities.
Prior to 9-11, gaining cockpit access was incredibly easy. Not that your scenario isn't without possibility (I won't elaborate), but that's way over the line for "complex," relative to the probability of failure. The perps of 9-11 were too knowledgeable to have needed anything complex, to gain cockpit entry.
Not that your scenario isn't without possibility (I won't elaborate), but that's way over the line for "complex," relative to the probability of failure. The perps of 9-11 were too knowledgeable to have needed anything complex, to gain cockpit entry.
Turning on a valve by remote control is far from complex. It could easily have been released into the cabin air flow, where EVERYONE on board was out cold or dead.
"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
#607. To: FormerLurker, Christine, Jethro Tull, All (#606)
Turning on a valve by remote control is far from complex. It could easily have been released into the cabin air flow, where EVERYONE on board was out cold or dead.
In the normal daily procedures of airlines, the canister would have been discovered. Add that the time it would take to install the cannister would require max exposure toward getting caught. What would one use as an antenna for the 'remote control?'
From ain airline pilot's position, the planes were flown by pros. Thus, the easy scenario would be to gain cockpit access by whatever means, don the emergency oxygen mask, then depressurize the cabin for a maximum of ten minutes, as the flight continued toward the target.
Sure, there are other possibilities, but what is most probable? I hate to pull rank, as a 757/767 airline pilot, but the entire remote control idea is radically more fantasy, than probability. Interesting discussion & debate; but hardly more. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. None of us were there.
Looking west to east...
![[Sept11Wiki]](/img/moin-inter.gif){kind=small}
No place is better than 
