World trade center video

[Smith]

Clicky (http://70.84.33.210/~infomedi/video/previews/170305martialpreview2.wmv)
Sorry its 30mb.

This vid has some interesting info on the trade center colapsing. Its very interesting, some stuff i never knew.

Well worth the download.

Sorry if its a repost :(

[GepperRankins]

despite the overwhelming evidence to suggest this is true and the official story is impossible, that's a wacky theory and you should be ashamed.

[Rat Faced]

Despite the fact that Bush's brothers contract finished that day, when no other planes were allowed in the air apart from the Saudi's, Bush wouldn't testify under oath, there were numerous eyewitnesses that helped the FBI load up the missing black-boxes and the fact that the damage by the planes was not enough to make them collapse... plus this additional taped evidence that the fires were under control and nearly out etc etc etc..

Even if they have found the Firefighters tapes that were suppressed...



I agree with GepperRankins that you should be ashamed for implying that there is a coverup. :snooty:

Its quite obviously something produced and made by some unpatriotic, anti-semetic, towel-head lover... :ph34r:






You know that those you have to convince would never, under any circumstances, actually watch video and audio evidence against there hero's.. :ph34r:

[GepperRankins]

i bet you could force them to watch it clockwork orange style and they wouldn't believe.

[Rat Faced]

i bet you could force them to watch it clockwork orange style and they wouldn't believe.


You could have them admit in court, with video of the planning and cackling at the millions they are gonna make.... and some people would still say they were being framed ;)

[Tikibonbon]

Despite the fact that Bush's brothers contract finished that day, when no other planes were allowed in the air apart from the Saudi's, Bush wouldn't testify under oath, there were numerous eyewitnesses that helped the FBI load up the missing black-boxes and the fact that the damage by the planes was not enough to make them collapse... plus this additional taped evidence that the fires were under control and nearly out etc etc etc..

Even if they have found the Firefighters tapes that were suppressed...



I agree with GepperRankins that you should be ashamed for implying that there is a coverup. :snooty:

Its quite obviously something produced and made by some unpatriotic, anti-semetic, towel-head lover... :ph34r:






You know that those you have to convince would never, under any circumstances, actually watch video and audio evidence against there hero's.. :ph34r:


So you are now blaming Bush for the deaths of the 3,000 people?

Granted, I am by no means whatsoever a supporter of Bush, but come now man. Are you finally going off the deep end?

[Rat Faced]

Have to admit... didnt think it'd be you...

http://www.randgraphics.org/photoshop/source_orca.jpg



And about Bush... he knew a lot more than he admits. Which is not the same as saying he is responsible ;)

[Tikibonbon]

I agree wholly that he knows a lot more. Obviously, in his position he would.

And I wasn't "fishing", I just typed what came to my mind after reading your post. Upon rereading, perhaps it was a bit silly, but anyways.

But I was wondering, are you or the person that makes the statement "wasn't enough damage to cause a collapse", capable of making this statement? What are the structural credentials for making this statement? I mean come on, it was A FRIGGIN' PLANE! They don't just doddle along the airways you knows.

Anyways, even if someone knew, whether Bush, or if it was still Clinton, or even H. Ross Perot, does it excuse the people who commited these acts since whoever knows things that the media doesn't have access to?

[GepperRankins]

it certainly doesn't excuse those who had it in their power to prevent it.

[Tikibonbon]

it certainly doesn't excuse those who had it in their power to prevent it.

Kinda like the London bombings, eh?

[GepperRankins]

i suppose, in a kind of not at all way.


howcome the important people were told to get off the WTC site. howcome WTC7 was already rigged to be demolished neatly. howcome the owner admitted this. it was obvious that someone on "our" side knew about 11th september before, so it could have been prevented.

apparently the london bombings were by a few people who could easily keep their plan secret. there was nothing special about the day they happened.


so who had it in their power to prevent the london bombings?


edit: unless the london bombs were part of a well written play :rolleyes:

[LegendaryU2K]

Nobody has power to prevent violence, only GOD, not man. Please try understanding that. If you think man can protect you , then i guess yal need to stop sleeping under the rock and crawl out and take a close look at the world and outside of the world.

And who gives a **** about some damn towers. Thats the thing that bother me alot on that day, people going around and being more concern about some damn buildings then people lives, shame on you humans.

[GepperRankins]

rodding was cool until everybody started doing it :dry:

[DanB]

Nobody has power to prevent violence, only GOD, not man. Please try understanding that. If you think man can protect you , then i guess yal need to stop sleeping under the rock and crawl out and take a close look at the world and outside of the world.

:lol:


so where has he been while all this stuff has been happening?

[Tikibonbon]

And who gives a **** about some damn towers.

I would imagine the 3k people who died in it, and their families and friends.

Dave, you might want to learn more about the believed "mastermind" behind the July 7 bombing. Seems he has more then a few dealings with MI6. Enough they sent him to the U.S. in 1999 for firearms and poison training.

You might want to ring up the Sheffield bus folks and ask them why all buses were delayed for more than a hour after being rerouted back to the depot to be checked for bombs, this on TUESDAY morning. Tuesday being the 5th. And also ask them of the news black out about the threats and why police were stopping red Suburus all over the city.

Did government officials in Sheffield and possibly other cities heed the warning that Blair chose to ignore?

[Smith]

Still, even if this isnt one big conspiracy, why would they demo the 7th building?

[Tikibonbon]

And what is up with some of the photos of one of the suspected bombers?

Take a look:

http://www.infowars.com/images2/London_attacks/250705fake3.jpg

http://www.infowars.com/images2/London_attacks/250705fake.jpg

http://www.infowars.com/images2/London_attacks/250705fake2.jpg

[cpt_azad]

wtf, some messed up pics u got there :blink:

[GepperRankins]

i'll read into it. i'd say those photos were just accidents of the light though

[Busyman]

I heard some of the same conspiracy theories about building 6.

I heard conspriracy theories about the North and South Towers as well.

I believe in heart that the plane in PA was shot down.......and that is was justified.

I don't believe Bush would be involved in a plot to bring down the towers...which allows the formation of the Patriot Act and segways to Iraq and probably more....that's just mad talk and I can't believe anyone has suggested it. :unsure:

If that's all true then Bush is truly Darth Sidious. Check the paralells.
Let's see if he votes himself in for more terms.

Maybe there will be some sudden national crisis during election time that prohibits...well...the election.

Anti-Christ like indeed.

I hope I'm not killed for writing this like the movie The Pelican Brief.

The Anti-Christ will claim to be devoutly religious and will have many followers based on his supposed belief.

Maybe there are movies chronicling this stuff on the humble.

In the Omen, Damian was sheperded through by people who knew who he was. The same with Rosemary's Baby.

A man that was supposed to strenghen our military but has greatly weakened it...unnecessarily. :tank:

Oh come heed fortheth and whatnot. The Tribulations are coming!!!!

:fear2: :sneaky: :devil: Muahahahahaha!!! :devil: :sneaky: :fear2:

[ziggyjuarez]

But fuck the mass media it’s lame like leprosy// it’s faker then a fame seeking celebrity// just turn the news off it’s just bs Government propaganda complicity// here’s one thing they don’t talk about, it was covered up instantly// it’s not given any air-time although the government say “it’s collapse is a mystery”// Cus it was hit by no plane// but at 5:20pm still fell all the same// 6.5 seconds straight down playing gravity, like it's a game// the 47 story collapse of WTC 7 is the name// to this lil rhyme that’s got no ticket to fame// cus the mass media has been locked down all the same// by the Bush-government who can not take the blame// cus that would be un-patriotic for a county that’s vain// despite the fact that the building had a CIA domain// with bullet proof windows on two floors// internal air and water supply, Iris scan doors// a sophisticated building with really no engineering flaws//
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SMALL_wtc-7_1_.gif(WTC7)
[color=blue]The truth is 9/11 was a messy inside job, they fucked up at every stage// like the wrong house busted in a police drug raid// with clues literally littered everywhere like a ticker-tape parade// but the propaganda so skilfully conducted using the power the media has to persuade// switching the peoples attention to fanatical Islamists like a mixer cross-fade!

[Busyman]

In the Omen, Damian was sheperded through by people who knew who he was. The same with Rosemary's Baby.

Damien was in Rosemary's Baby? :huh:
Good point.

The baby was sheparded through in uh..Rosemary's Baby. :lol: :lol:

[ziggyjuarez]

Ok, this is to all of the people who still believe 9/11 was the work of 19 Arabic Hijackers and an operation entirely masterminded by Osama Bin Laden, mainly because he hates our freedom’s and disagrees with American Liberalism. Despite all of their hard work, the United States Government simply could not see the attack coming.

When one considers all of the hardcore facts, there is no way this excuse holds even a grain of truth in it. The official story is impossible and simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Even more laughable is the excuse given by government officials that it was simply a "failure of intelligence" and the attack could not be averted. Politicians should not even form their mouths to even use an incompetence excuse. Warnings were received by the US by at least 18 other countries, and agents in the CIA, and the FBI were warned. The FAA got warnings too. In fact,

Prior Knowledge:

CIA had high-jacker details (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3516233.stm)
Taliban warned the US of huge attack (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2242594.stm)
FBI warned of plot to high-jack planes in 1995 (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/18/inv.hijacking.philippines/index.html)
FBI warned of Suspicious flight student last year (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/FOX%20NEWS_FBI%20Agent%20Warned%20of%20Suspicious%20Flight%20Students%20Last%20Summer.html)CIA ignorned warnings of Al-Queda (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/FINANCIAL%20TIMES_CIA%20'ignored%20warning'%20on%20al%20Qaeda.htm)
US knew of Suicide highjack threat in 1995 (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,47133,00.html)
The airlift of evil (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/MSNBC_The%20airlift%20of%20evil.htm)
Threat of US attacks passed Taliban weeks before the attacks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,556254,00.html)
US clamps secrecy on attacks before 911 (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/NEWS%20DAY_US%20Clamps%20Secrecy%20on%20Warnings%20Before%209-11.htm)


It seems that there were so many warnings, that


"The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence." Micheal Meacher, Tony Blairs former environmental advisor until 2003. London Guardian (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)

In addition to these Government officials and other people received individuals warnings as well. Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco was warned a full eight hours before the attack not to fly on 911, author Salmon Rushdie was publicly banned from flying before 911, and John Ashcroft former Attorney General stopped flying commercially six months before 911. Even some people working inside of the towers got instant messages, telling them to evacuate the WTC.

We must ask ourselves, where did all this prior knowledge come from, and why was it all ignored? Is it possible for that this much information of this magnitude of importance to get tangled up in a beaurecratic web of telephone lines? The answer is NO, people in side of the Trade Towers got INSTANT MESSAGES telling them the buildings were going to be destroyed two hours before it happened. You’re going to tell me someone can get an INSTANT MESSAGE to someone inside the World Trade Center two hours before the attack, but no one can get the message to the President of the United States? Impossible, this is the equivalent to saying people who work in the WTC have access to better inteligence than the president does. Someone calls up calls Mayor Willie Brown eight hours before the attack, and tells him not to fly, BUT THEY CAN'T CONTACT THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLERS AND WARN THEM AHEAD OF TIME?!??!

Sources:

Odigo Says Workers Were Warned of the Attack (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=77744&contrassID=/has%5C)
San Francisco Chronicle - Mayor Willie Brown got Low-Key Warning about Air Travel (http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_mnreport.shtml)
The Truth Seeker-Condi Lisa Rice Warned Willie Brown and Told him not to fly on 911 (http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1000)
CBS News - Ashcroft Flying High (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml)


In addition there are over 600 smoking gun holes and unanswered questions in the official story of 911; I'm only going to scratch the surface, w/ some of the main ones.

First thing is the NORAD stand down order.

"The first hijacking was suspected at not later than 8.20am, and the last hijacked aircraft crashed in Pennsylvania at 10.06am. Not a single fighter plane was scrambled to investigate from the US Andrews airforce base, just 10 miles from Washington DC, until after the third plane had hit the Pentagon at 9.38 am. Why not? There were standard FAA intercept procedures for hijacked aircraft before 9/11. Between September 2000 and June 2001 the US military launched fighter aircraft on 67 occasions to chase suspicious aircraft" (AP, August 13 2002)
guardian, once again (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)

NORAD completely stood down, this is a clear violation of FAA flight regulations, and NORAD could have probably stopped the attack, at least partially. The morning of 911 NORAD was training in a war game of flying hijacked aircrafts into buildings ON the Morning of 911. On the Morning of 911??!?! Yep, the drill stopped just 50 minutes before the Hi-Jacking began. No wonder there was no Military Response, NORAD was told that the planes being Hijacked were just part of a drill. That's why they stood down.

What are the chances of this happening? It's just a coincidence that they were running a war-game drill, mirroring the same monumental event to be documented in history books for centuries? Of course it’s possible, but very VERY unlikely.

This is so weird to have happened, and even weirder is the fact that this type of a wargame is going on the morning of 911. This type of event would be simmilar to seeing Oswald and the CIA training how to kill Kennedy in Dealy Plaza an hour before it happened.

Yahoo News - Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/YAHOO%20NEWS_Agency%20planned%20exercise%20on%20Sept%2011%20built%20around%20a%20plane%20crashing%20into%20a%20building.htm)
USA Today - NORAD has drills to use jets as weapons (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm)
Associated Press - Exercise built around crashing planes into buildings (http://www.boston.com/news/packages/sept11/anniversary/wire_stories/0903_plane_exercise.htm)



In addition, the list of the 19 hijackers and their picture identification was assembled and aired just hours after the attack. How do we jump to the accusations that 19 suspects are guilty of 3,000 American murders when most, if not all of the evidence, is twisted metal and degenerated ashes that used to be people? Actually by the time the hijackers had their mug shots aired on TV, all of the crime scenes had been destroyed. Buildings one and two collapsed, as well as the mysterious building seven collapsing on its own, the plane that hit the pentagon decentegrated, and flight 93 was likely shot down, hours later we miraculously post all of their mug shots on the news? Damn, we must be good.

So how exactly did the United States leap to their allegations of guilt?

A travel bag belonging to one of the 911 hijackers was found at the airport after the attacks, absolutely ruling beyond any doubt, that this was the work of Al-Queda.

Question: Why would a hijacker, planning to commit suicide, even BRING A BAG? Let alone pack it w/ incriminating evidence sure to unleash a fire storm of military hell on all of his fellow Mid Eastern people? The bag contained enough evidences to precisely tie the perpetrators to the Taliban and Al-Queda justify the assault in Afghanistan.


Answer: this is MANUFACTURED EVIDENCE


Now BBC has began running stories that many of these men have shown up as being still alive. The 911 Hijackers steal our planes to suicide attack us because were apparently not in sync with what the Qu'ran says, and then they show up still being alive. So that means that at least five of the men on the hi-jackers list cannot be the same men who were on the plane. But the government has stuck to their official story on this, and no one in the mainstream media has ever brought this up, or challenged them on it. Many of the hijackers are now appearing on television in their countries and professing their innocence. A lot of information like this has been circulating around other parts of the world, and it is likely part of the reason why America's image has dropped from negative to terrible. Most people in other countries know this is going on, but Americans are sleeping.


The Truth is unleashed in other parts of the world but it’s concealed from American eyes as a way to demonize Americans to the rest of the world, while American media demonizes the rest of the world (particularly Arabs) to America, this is a way of polarizing both side to inspire conflict on both sides.

Sources:


High JAck Suspects alive and well (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm)
High Jack Suspects Alive in Morroco (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1558669.stm)


Bombs in the Towers


http://www.prisonplanet.tv/images/may2004/050504collapse.jpg

___ This next part is important, because it's hardcore vissual evidence of government involvement in 9/11 and is nearly impossible to deny.

Building seven, first of all, was the third building to collapse within the World Trade Center Complex. According to the government’s official story, building seven was destroyed from fire, along with buildings one and two.

Videos Show Building 7's 6.5 second symmetrical collapse

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SMALL_wtc-7_1_.gif

First of all it’s important to say that fire has never once brought a steel structure down. Out of 100 uncontrolled fires in the last 50 years NEVER has fire collapsed a steel building, only earthquakes and explosives have been able to flatten these modern structures.

So, why is building seven so significant? It’s important because building seven collapsed without being struck by an airplane or anything else, almost as if it were the wind that knocked it over.

Several videos have been salvaged which show building seven's collapse and shocking evidence has surfaced from scrutiny.

CBS Broadcast of Buildinding Seven's fall - Dan Rather admits it looks like Explosives (http://www.wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc_7_cbs.mpg)
Building Seven's Collapase from a mile away (http://wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc7_collapse.mpg)
Building Seven's Colapse from 1000 feet away, this is very obvious (http://www.wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg)

You see, building seven DECENTEGRATED INTO RUBBLE in a vertical symmetrical fashion in 6.5 seconds. If building seven was taken down by an aircraft impact (even though it was not) it would have thrown back horizontally, transferring the energy away from the airplane impacts. And if it was fire, eventhough the flames would have had to have burnt exponentically hotter for a much longer time, we would have seen the structure reduced into liquid metal, and the streets would be a river of flame. But this building simply fell straight to the ground and crumbled.

I need to explain something about controlled demolition. First of all, when buildings are demolished the explosives are placed in the central column, so the structure falls inwards and does not damage other surrounding buildings. So they only way the building can fall like this or fall period is through the use of explosives.

THE FEMA REPORT ON WORLD TRADE CENTER 7 COLLAPSE IS A TOTAL JOKE. (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fema_report.html)

http://wtc7.net/docs/streamers.jpg

“Each of the following videos shows the entire visible portion of the building falling with a vertical precision otherwise seen only in controlled demolition. Moreover, they show that the collapse took only about 6.5 seconds from start to finish. That rate of fall is within a second of the time it would take an object to fall from the building's roof with no air resistance”

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/WTCDemol.jpg

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/WTC-bomb-frame048enhanced.jpg

BUT, building seven is even more important because the offical story of building seven collapse is because it was damaged from fire, HOWEVER, Larry Silverstine the owner of buildings one, two, and seven, got on televiosn on America Rebuilds on PBS, and slipped up, ADMITTING, THAT HE BLEW UP BUILDING SEVEN, He Said "WE PULLED THE BUILDING!" Here's the video from the PBS documentary.

http://infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV

Here's another clip where a demolitions expert describes "PULL IT" As a controlled demolition.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/pullit2.mp3

NOW, it's extremely important to mention that rigging buildins with explosives is a tiresom and very time consuming process, and to properly plant explosives in amathematicaly harmonious fasion to create a smooth symetrical drop. Actually it would take weeks to prepare for the demolition. So not only does Larry Silverstine, the owner of the complex admit to blowing up building seven, But building seven COULD NOT have been demolished on such short notice. Weeks of demolitions planning does not jive well with Osama's suprise attack. In fact it's impossible.

Another particularly important part of this is to note that Towers one, two, and seven have all of the 10 chartecteristics of a controlled demolition, a building collapseing from fire and plane impact damage having one of the charecteristics of controlled demolition is astronomically rare, the chances of this damage haveing all 10 charecteristics of a controlled demolition and not being a controled demolition is next to nil. These charecteristics 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.?

Source:

Professor David Ray Griffin
http://www.rbnlive.com/absentia_trial.html

Good lookin to Dem Bruce Lee Stylez, and his MIGHTY nine eleven thread right here (http://immortal-technique.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4020&st=0)

Historical Comparison

http://www.historyproject.net/images/vol01/28-1125a.jpg

----The Burning of the Reichstag



In 1933 Adolph Hitler wanted to seize dictotorial powers and turn Germany into a police state. So he set the massive governmental building on fire, that is known as the Reichstag (German Parliament) the blazing infernos sent the population into a state of petrified fear. Adolph Hitler and his party won by a landslide in the election just weeks later and later on was able to merge the Chancellor’s powers with that of the Presidents, and this is the origin of where his dictatorial power came from. Hitler also blamed the terrorist attack on the communists, and recived a pretext, or a reason, to attack them.


The real Pretext

Hitler’s conspiratorial tactic of burning the Reichstag to receive dictatorial power, and a pretext to attack his enemies is a method that is known as the Hegelian Dialectic, which is translated simply as problem, reaction, solution. The Hegelian Dialectic is a tactic that was developed by the 19th century German philosopher George Wilhelm Fredric Hegel. The way this works is, you create a crisis, the population is thrown into fear, and then you, the creator of the crisis, step in with a pre-organized solution, and pose as the savior. As soon as 911 occurred, literally while the smoke was still streaming from the building, politicians began targeting us with Doublethink approaches to get us to give up our freedom for security.

I don't want to digress too much, but this is important.

Doublethink is the practice of misrepresenting something bad as something good, such as pushing identity theft propaganda in order to get the people wanting a national ID card. This was the phrase coined in George Orwell's book 1984, which psychologically persuaded the population to relinquish there freedom unto big brother and simultaneously be happy about it. We see doublethink utilized daily by politicians.

The Hegelian Dialectic fused with the double think approach has given ruthless men an unbelievably effective tactic of power consolidation. But this time it's bigger,

http://www.redrat.net/BUSH_WAR/New-World-Order.jpg


PNAC(Project For a New American Centeury

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was founded by Dick Chenney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby and others in 2000. This is a pro-globalization neo-con think tank. On his website Dick Cheney lays out a Blueprint for America to invade many of it's neighbors and construct a "global command and control system" Cheney sites Syria, Libya, and North Korea as terrorist regimes, and uses their existence to justify invasions and restructuring there powers under a Pax America. It's strange, earlier in the year, Rumsfeld was selling Nuclear Reactors to North Korea. Now he's sitting in meetings at PNAC calling them a dangerous regime. HaHa, who made them more dangerous, Mr. Rumsfeld?
This document also mentions that public support would be very difficult to rally for these upcoming wars, and that a "Pearl Harbor Like Attack" would be very helpful. Now this is a public document, saying we need helpful Pearl Harbor attacks, that's motive, and practically admittance.

Sources:

PNAC offical site (http://www.newamericancentury.org/) read the documents.
Meacher talks about PNAC too (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)
Guardian UK - The Two Faces of Rumseld (http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,952289,00.html)

Not only this, but


"the US and the UK, are running dangerously low on hydrocarbon energy supplies. And by 2010 the Muslim world will control as much as 60% of the worlds oil production, and 95% of the remaining exportable oil. "

Protecting oil supplies in a crisis (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/937573.stm)
Taliban to Texas for Oil Talks (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/west_asia/36735.stm)
Bottom of the Barrel, the world is runnin out of oil, why do Politicans refuse to talk about it? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1097622,00.html)
Threats of US to strike Taliban weeks before the attacks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,556254,00.html)



Cui Bono(Who Benefits?)
Bush restricts 911 probes (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/WASHINGTON%20POST_Bush%20Seeks%20To%20Restrict%20Hill%20Probes%20Of%20Sept%2011.htm)Top Taladan leader freed by US (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/09/wtal09.xml)
911 study hindered (http://www.sptimes.com/2002/05/09/Worldandnation/Graham__911_study_hin.shtml)
Bush trying to hide 911 information (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/5993628.htm)
911 documents to sensitive for realse (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/27/bush.911/)
Bush discourages 911 investagations (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/)
Times of India - Bush took FBI agents off the Trail of Bin Ladens (http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/articleshow?art_id=1030259305)
Guardian UK - Agent Blasts FBI over 11 Sept 'cover up' (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,722426,00.html)


Goes on and on


Prominent 911 whistle blowers

One might wonder, if all of this evidence which literally swiss chesses the offical story being in existene, why has there not been more of an outcry about it? Well, there has, famous people all over the world have been questioning and exposeing the 911 coverup.

Micheal Meacher MP, former enviromental advisor in the British Government - This War on Terrorism is Bogus
former UK Government Minister speaks out about the standdown of NORAD on September 11th, PNAC and the pre-planned wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,...1036571,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html)
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/070204meacher.htm

Andre Van Buelow
Von Buelow is the former German Defense Minister and Minister of Technology. Von Buelow went public to say the US government carried out 9/11. His book is one of the bestsellers across Europe.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/021104vonbuelow.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/020804vonbuelow.html

Robert Wright, FBI special Agent,
http://www.prisonplanet.com/FBI_agent_I_wa...error_probe.htm (http://www.prisonplanet.com/FBI_agent_I_was_stymied_in_terror_probe.htm)

Cynthia Mckinney (Representative D-GA) Grills Rumsfeld on wargames going on the morning of 9/11, he does not deny
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinn...ls_rumsfeld.htm (http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm)

Morgan Reynolds, (former chief economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term) says 911 Offical story is a fruad
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20...02755-6408r.htm (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-102755-6408r.htm)
http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds7.html
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44787


AND, Jimmy Walters the billionaire activist has gone so far as to, run commericals on televission, showing the evidence behinde building seven, and has also offered a $100,000 reward to any enginner who can proove that the towers fell the way they were said to have fallen in the offical story.

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/new...hp?storyid=1013 (http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1013)
September 11 conspiracy theorist offers prize - Reuters (http://reopen911.org/Yahoo!%20News%20-%20September%2011%20conspiracy%20theorist%20offers%20prize.htm)






Summary:


911 was such a cataclysmic event, it galvanized both the idiots and the intellectuals of America into a flag waving frenzy for nearly five years. 911 has become a never ending excuse to fight any war over seas, and implement any authoritarian rule domestically. Politicians were so quick to exploit this event, jumping in there tanks and battle suits while rushing 1000 page bills through the Senate and House. One has to wonder, why the knee jerk reaction of this attack was to shift into throwing a doublethink deception at the people, telling them to give up freedom for liberty before the smoke had yet to even clear from the air.

Giving up freedom for Liberty is a False Paradigm. No Liberty = Tyranny.

As the Roman judges used to say when a crime was committed, “key bono?”, or who benefits? The globalists who masterminded this attack want authoritarian control of America, invasion into uncontrolled Arab states, and overall a world climate that is so dangerous and unstable, the people will beg them for a one world government. A government ruled by them. Order out of chaos.

I've developed quite a case here, and I think my arguments are supported extremely well, even without all of my information on the towers; this is very strong evidence that we are being lied too, almost on a daily basis. Most of this literally proves the official story is a fraud and there's a lot of things I chose not to talk about, like 100s of Al-Queda and Taliban being flown out after 911, Insider trading right before 911, or Bush pulling FBI agents off of the Trail of the Bin Laden right before 911 (Edit: I did touch on that) and signing documents to protect them. However I've come to the conclusion that in this instance, the problem is there is actually TOO MUCH evidence here, so I won't even bother with the links for my last claims.

If you think I've made a compelling case, than I urge you learn more about this, because if I'm even remotely correct, and this New World Order aka the "Global Union" is created, by the same creatures who carried out this attack, I don't think your going to want to live under the tyranny grids they've constructed for you. I'm not charging the government with carrying this out, but these Rogue elements with tentacles into our government, who live in families who are worth five times as much as our countries annual budget. If you look more into this, I know you'll see that what I'm saying is true, this is what has happened with me. So please spread this thread around as much as you can, watch some of these movies I post at the bottom, PLEASE look into this more. I know when you find out what I'm saying is real, you'll fight it with even more compassion.

In the past only small pockets of people have had information on this subject, which served to cloak events in a protective secrecy. But lately a plethora of new information has been consolidated, creating an incredibly chaotic environment for the globalist where the risk of mass exposure is becoming very real. So once you learn, please spread this information on to others.

This is an information war, against elites with 90% of the wealth trying to control the political and financial systems to control mankind, and doing it for there own selfish desires. And information of this type is so much more powerful than any gun or grenade or tank or anything. Every single word we spew of resistance is a bullet, discharged from a chamber and sent into the heart of the New World Order Demon, and it will take a lot to kill it, but humanity will prevail.

911 Documentaries


Martial Law: 911 Rise of the Police State (The best damn 911 movie ever made)
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/images/march2005/040305martialcover.jpg
Windows Media Player:
Broadband:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmv

Dial up:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml56k.wmv

Stream:

Broadband:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmx

Dial up:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml56k.wmx

911- The Road To Tyranny (http://www.archive.org/movies/details-db.php?collection=independent_news&collectionid=911theRoadtoTyranny)

Paineful Deceptions
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 1 (pentagon) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part1.wmv)
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 2 (building 7 and the two towers) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part2.wmv)
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 3 (media propaganda) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part3.wmv)

The Masters of terror
2:00:09
http://thewebfairy.com/video/collected/Mas...ror_128KBps.wmv

911 Truth and Lies 4 parts

http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart1.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart2.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart3.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart4.wmv

Michael Parenti-Terrorism, Globalism and Conspiracy
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti1.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti2.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti3.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti4.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti5.wmv

Illuminazi 9-11
http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads/illuminazi.wmv

The Microchip
http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads/The%20Microchip.wmv

Free ebooks

The Secret Rituals of the O.T.O. (Illuminati, Templars, Freemasons, etc.).pdf (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/The%20Secret%20Rituals%20of%20the%20O.T.O.%20(Illuminati,%20Templars,%20Freemasons,%20etc.).pdf)
Order Out of Chaos - Paul Joseph Watson (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Order%20Out%20of%20Chaos%20-%20By%20Paul%20Joseph%20Watson.pdf)
A Chronological History of the New World Order - Denis Cuddy (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Chronological%20History%20of%20The%20New%20World%20Order%20-%20By%20Dennis%20Cuddy.pdf)
Conspiracy ebook - The New World Order - Milton William Cooper (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/conspiracy%20ebook%20-%20New%20World%20Order%20by%20Milton%20William%20Cooper.pdf)
Global Tyranny Step by Step - By WIlliam F. Jasper (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Global%20Tyranny%20Step%20By%20Step%20-%20By%20William%20F%20Jasper.pdf)


A shit load more Documentaries and ebooks can be found here (http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads.html)

[Tikibonbon]

Ok, this is to all of the people who still believe 9/11 was the work of 19 Arabic Hijackers and an operation entirely masterminded by Osama Bin Laden, mainly because he hates our freedom’s and disagrees with American Liberalism. Despite all of their hard work, the United States Government simply could not see the attack coming.

When one considers all of the hardcore facts, there is no way this excuse holds even a grain of truth in it. The official story is impossible and simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Even more laughable is the excuse given by government officials that it was simply a "failure of intelligence" and the attack could not be averted. Politicians should not even form their mouths to even use an incompetence excuse. Warnings were received by the US by at least 18 other countries, and agents in the CIA, and the FBI were warned. The FAA got warnings too. In fact,

Prior Knowledge:

CIA had high-jacker details (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3516233.stm)
Taliban warned the US of huge attack (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2242594.stm)
FBI warned of plot to high-jack planes in 1995 (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/18/inv.hijacking.philippines/index.html)
FBI warned of Suspicious flight student last year (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/FOX%20NEWS_FBI%20Agent%20Warned%20of%20Suspicious%20Flight%20Students%20Last%20Summer.html)CIA ignorned warnings of Al-Queda (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/FINANCIAL%20TIMES_CIA%20'ignored%20warning'%20on%20al%20Qaeda.htm)
US knew of Suicide highjack threat in 1995 (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,47133,00.html)
The airlift of evil (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/MSNBC_The%20airlift%20of%20evil.htm)
Threat of US attacks passed Taliban weeks before the attacks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,556254,00.html)
US clamps secrecy on attacks before 911 (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/NEWS%20DAY_US%20Clamps%20Secrecy%20on%20Warnings%20Before%209-11.htm)


It seems that there were so many warnings, that


"The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence." Micheal Meacher, Tony Blairs former environmental advisor until 2003. London Guardian (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)

In addition to these Government officials and other people received individuals warnings as well. Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco was warned a full eight hours before the attack not to fly on 911, author Salmon Rushdie was publicly banned from flying before 911, and John Ashcroft former Attorney General stopped flying commercially six months before 911. Even some people working inside of the towers got instant messages, telling them to evacuate the WTC.

We must ask ourselves, where did all this prior knowledge come from, and why was it all ignored? Is it possible for that this much information of this magnitude of importance to get tangled up in a beaurecratic web of telephone lines? The answer is NO, people in side of the Trade Towers got INSTANT MESSAGES telling them the buildings were going to be destroyed two hours before it happened. You’re going to tell me someone can get an INSTANT MESSAGE to someone inside the World Trade Center two hours before the attack, but no one can get the message to the President of the United States? Impossible, this is the equivalent to saying people who work in the WTC have access to better inteligence than the president does. Someone calls up calls Mayor Willie Brown eight hours before the attack, and tells him not to fly, BUT THEY CAN'T CONTACT THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLERS AND WARN THEM AHEAD OF TIME?!??!

Sources:

Odigo Says Workers Were Warned of the Attack (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=77744&contrassID=/has%5C)
San Francisco Chronicle - Mayor Willie Brown got Low-Key Warning about Air Travel (http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_mnreport.shtml)
The Truth Seeker-Condi Lisa Rice Warned Willie Brown and Told him not to fly on 911 (http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1000)
CBS News - Ashcroft Flying High (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml)


In addition there are over 600 smoking gun holes and unanswered questions in the official story of 911; I'm only going to scratch the surface, w/ some of the main ones.

First thing is the NORAD stand down order.

"The first hijacking was suspected at not later than 8.20am, and the last hijacked aircraft crashed in Pennsylvania at 10.06am. Not a single fighter plane was scrambled to investigate from the US Andrews airforce base, just 10 miles from Washington DC, until after the third plane had hit the Pentagon at 9.38 am. Why not? There were standard FAA intercept procedures for hijacked aircraft before 9/11. Between September 2000 and June 2001 the US military launched fighter aircraft on 67 occasions to chase suspicious aircraft" (AP, August 13 2002)
guardian, once again (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)

NORAD completely stood down, this is a clear violation of FAA flight regulations, and NORAD could have probably stopped the attack, at least partially. The morning of 911 NORAD was training in a war game of flying hijacked aircrafts into buildings ON the Morning of 911. On the Morning of 911??!?! Yep, the drill stopped just 50 minutes before the Hi-Jacking began. No wonder there was no Military Response, NORAD was told that the planes being Hijacked were just part of a drill. That's why they stood down.

What are the chances of this happening? It's just a coincidence that they were running a war-game drill, mirroring the same monumental event to be documented in history books for centuries? Of course it’s possible, but very VERY unlikely.

This is so weird to have happened, and even weirder is the fact that this type of a wargame is going on the morning of 911. This type of event would be simmilar to seeing Oswald and the CIA training how to kill Kennedy in Dealy Plaza an hour before it happened.

Yahoo News - Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/YAHOO%20NEWS_Agency%20planned%20exercise%20on%20Sept%2011%20built%20around%20a%20plane%20crashing%20into%20a%20building.htm)
USA Today - NORAD has drills to use jets as weapons (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm)
Associated Press - Exercise built around crashing planes into buildings (http://www.boston.com/news/packages/sept11/anniversary/wire_stories/0903_plane_exercise.htm)



In addition, the list of the 19 hijackers and their picture identification was assembled and aired just hours after the attack. How do we jump to the accusations that 19 suspects are guilty of 3,000 American murders when most, if not all of the evidence, is twisted metal and degenerated ashes that used to be people? Actually by the time the hijackers had their mug shots aired on TV, all of the crime scenes had been destroyed. Buildings one and two collapsed, as well as the mysterious building seven collapsing on its own, the plane that hit the pentagon decentegrated, and flight 93 was likely shot down, hours later we miraculously post all of their mug shots on the news? Damn, we must be good.

So how exactly did the United States leap to their allegations of guilt?

A travel bag belonging to one of the 911 hijackers was found at the airport after the attacks, absolutely ruling beyond any doubt, that this was the work of Al-Queda.

Question: Why would a hijacker, planning to commit suicide, even BRING A BAG? Let alone pack it w/ incriminating evidence sure to unleash a fire storm of military hell on all of his fellow Mid Eastern people? The bag contained enough evidences to precisely tie the perpetrators to the Taliban and Al-Queda justify the assault in Afghanistan.


Answer: this is MANUFACTURED EVIDENCE


Now BBC has began running stories that many of these men have shown up as being still alive. The 911 Hijackers steal our planes to suicide attack us because were apparently not in sync with what the Qu'ran says, and then they show up still being alive. So that means that at least five of the men on the hi-jackers list cannot be the same men who were on the plane. But the government has stuck to their official story on this, and no one in the mainstream media has ever brought this up, or challenged them on it. Many of the hijackers are now appearing on television in their countries and professing their innocence. A lot of information like this has been circulating around other parts of the world, and it is likely part of the reason why America's image has dropped from negative to terrible. Most people in other countries know this is going on, but Americans are sleeping.


The Truth is unleashed in other parts of the world but it’s concealed from American eyes as a way to demonize Americans to the rest of the world, while American media demonizes the rest of the world (particularly Arabs) to America, this is a way of polarizing both side to inspire conflict on both sides.

Sources:


High JAck Suspects alive and well (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm)
High Jack Suspects Alive in Morroco (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1558669.stm)


Bombs in the Towers


http://www.prisonplanet.tv/images/may2004/050504collapse.jpg

___ This next part is important, because it's hardcore vissual evidence of government involvement in 9/11 and is nearly impossible to deny.

Building seven, first of all, was the third building to collapse within the World Trade Center Complex. According to the government’s official story, building seven was destroyed from fire, along with buildings one and two.

Videos Show Building 7's 6.5 second symmetrical collapse

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SMALL_wtc-7_1_.gif

First of all it’s important to say that fire has never once brought a steel structure down. Out of 100 uncontrolled fires in the last 50 years NEVER has fire collapsed a steel building, only earthquakes and explosives have been able to flatten these modern structures.

So, why is building seven so significant? It’s important because building seven collapsed without being struck by an airplane or anything else, almost as if it were the wind that knocked it over.

Several videos have been salvaged which show building seven's collapse and shocking evidence has surfaced from scrutiny.

CBS Broadcast of Buildinding Seven's fall - Dan Rather admits it looks like Explosives (http://www.wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc_7_cbs.mpg)
Building Seven's Collapase from a mile away (http://wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc7_collapse.mpg)
Building Seven's Colapse from 1000 feet away, this is very obvious (http://www.wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg)

You see, building seven DECENTEGRATED INTO RUBBLE in a vertical symmetrical fashion in 6.5 seconds. If building seven was taken down by an aircraft impact (even though it was not) it would have thrown back horizontally, transferring the energy away from the airplane impacts. And if it was fire, eventhough the flames would have had to have burnt exponentically hotter for a much longer time, we would have seen the structure reduced into liquid metal, and the streets would be a river of flame. But this building simply fell straight to the ground and crumbled.

I need to explain something about controlled demolition. First of all, when buildings are demolished the explosives are placed in the central column, so the structure falls inwards and does not damage other surrounding buildings. So they only way the building can fall like this or fall period is through the use of explosives.

THE FEMA REPORT ON WORLD TRADE CENTER 7 COLLAPSE IS A TOTAL JOKE. (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fema_report.html)

http://wtc7.net/docs/streamers.jpg

“Each of the following videos shows the entire visible portion of the building falling with a vertical precision otherwise seen only in controlled demolition. Moreover, they show that the collapse took only about 6.5 seconds from start to finish. That rate of fall is within a second of the time it would take an object to fall from the building's roof with no air resistance”

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/WTCDemol.jpg

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/WTC-bomb-frame048enhanced.jpg

BUT, building seven is even more important because the offical story of building seven collapse is because it was damaged from fire, HOWEVER, Larry Silverstine the owner of buildings one, two, and seven, got on televiosn on America Rebuilds on PBS, and slipped up, ADMITTING, THAT HE BLEW UP BUILDING SEVEN, He Said "WE PULLED THE BUILDING!" Here's the video from the PBS documentary.

http://infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV

Here's another clip where a demolitions expert describes "PULL IT" As a controlled demolition.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/pullit2.mp3

NOW, it's extremely important to mention that rigging buildins with explosives is a tiresom and very time consuming process, and to properly plant explosives in amathematicaly harmonious fasion to create a smooth symetrical drop. Actually it would take weeks to prepare for the demolition. So not only does Larry Silverstine, the owner of the complex admit to blowing up building seven, But building seven COULD NOT have been demolished on such short notice. Weeks of demolitions planning does not jive well with Osama's suprise attack. In fact it's impossible.

Another particularly important part of this is to note that Towers one, two, and seven have all of the 10 chartecteristics of a controlled demolition, a building collapseing from fire and plane impact damage having one of the charecteristics of controlled demolition is astronomically rare, the chances of this damage haveing all 10 charecteristics of a controlled demolition and not being a controled demolition is next to nil. These charecteristics 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.?

Source:

Professor David Ray Griffin
http://www.rbnlive.com/absentia_trial.html

Good lookin to Dem Bruce Lee Stylez, and his MIGHTY nine eleven thread right here (http://immortal-technique.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4020&st=0)

Historical Comparison

http://www.historyproject.net/images/vol01/28-1125a.jpg

----The Burning of the Reichstag



In 1933 Adolph Hitler wanted to seize dictotorial powers and turn Germany into a police state. So he set the massive governmental building on fire, that is known as the Reichstag (German Parliament) the blazing infernos sent the population into a state of petrified fear. Adolph Hitler and his party won by a landslide in the election just weeks later and later on was able to merge the Chancellor’s powers with that of the Presidents, and this is the origin of where his dictatorial power came from. Hitler also blamed the terrorist attack on the communists, and recived a pretext, or a reason, to attack them.


The real Pretext

Hitler’s conspiratorial tactic of burning the Reichstag to receive dictatorial power, and a pretext to attack his enemies is a method that is known as the Hegelian Dialectic, which is translated simply as problem, reaction, solution. The Hegelian Dialectic is a tactic that was developed by the 19th century German philosopher George Wilhelm Fredric Hegel. The way this works is, you create a crisis, the population is thrown into fear, and then you, the creator of the crisis, step in with a pre-organized solution, and pose as the savior. As soon as 911 occurred, literally while the smoke was still streaming from the building, politicians began targeting us with Doublethink approaches to get us to give up our freedom for security.

I don't want to digress too much, but this is important.

Doublethink is the practice of misrepresenting something bad as something good, such as pushing identity theft propaganda in order to get the people wanting a national ID card. This was the phrase coined in George Orwell's book 1984, which psychologically persuaded the population to relinquish there freedom unto big brother and simultaneously be happy about it. We see doublethink utilized daily by politicians.

The Hegelian Dialectic fused with the double think approach has given ruthless men an unbelievably effective tactic of power consolidation. But this time it's bigger,

http://www.redrat.net/BUSH_WAR/New-World-Order.jpg


PNAC(Project For a New American Centeury

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was founded by Dick Chenney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby and others in 2000. This is a pro-globalization neo-con think tank. On his website Dick Cheney lays out a Blueprint for America to invade many of it's neighbors and construct a "global command and control system" Cheney sites Syria, Libya, and North Korea as terrorist regimes, and uses their existence to justify invasions and restructuring there powers under a Pax America. It's strange, earlier in the year, Rumsfeld was selling Nuclear Reactors to North Korea. Now he's sitting in meetings at PNAC calling them a dangerous regime. HaHa, who made them more dangerous, Mr. Rumsfeld?
This document also mentions that public support would be very difficult to rally for these upcoming wars, and that a "Pearl Harbor Like Attack" would be very helpful. Now this is a public document, saying we need helpful Pearl Harbor attacks, that's motive, and practically admittance.

Sources:

PNAC offical site (http://www.newamericancentury.org/) read the documents.
Meacher talks about PNAC too (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)
Guardian UK - The Two Faces of Rumseld (http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,952289,00.html)

Not only this, but


"the US and the UK, are running dangerously low on hydrocarbon energy supplies. And by 2010 the Muslim world will control as much as 60% of the worlds oil production, and 95% of the remaining exportable oil. "

Protecting oil supplies in a crisis (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/937573.stm)
Taliban to Texas for Oil Talks (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/west_asia/36735.stm)
Bottom of the Barrel, the world is runnin out of oil, why do Politicans refuse to talk about it? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1097622,00.html)
Threats of US to strike Taliban weeks before the attacks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,556254,00.html)



Cui Bono(Who Benefits?)
Bush restricts 911 probes (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/WASHINGTON%20POST_Bush%20Seeks%20To%20Restrict%20Hill%20Probes%20Of%20Sept%2011.htm)Top Taladan leader freed by US (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/09/wtal09.xml)
911 study hindered (http://www.sptimes.com/2002/05/09/Worldandnation/Graham__911_study_hin.shtml)
Bush trying to hide 911 information (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/5993628.htm)
911 documents to sensitive for realse (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/27/bush.911/)
Bush discourages 911 investagations (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/)
Times of India - Bush took FBI agents off the Trail of Bin Ladens (http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/articleshow?art_id=1030259305)
Guardian UK - Agent Blasts FBI over 11 Sept 'cover up' (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,722426,00.html)


Goes on and on


Prominent 911 whistle blowers

One might wonder, if all of this evidence which literally swiss chesses the offical story being in existene, why has there not been more of an outcry about it? Well, there has, famous people all over the world have been questioning and exposeing the 911 coverup.

Micheal Meacher MP, former enviromental advisor in the British Government - This War on Terrorism is Bogus
former UK Government Minister speaks out about the standdown of NORAD on September 11th, PNAC and the pre-planned wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,...1036571,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html)
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/070204meacher.htm

Andre Van Buelow
Von Buelow is the former German Defense Minister and Minister of Technology. Von Buelow went public to say the US government carried out 9/11. His book is one of the bestsellers across Europe.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/021104vonbuelow.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/020804vonbuelow.html

Robert Wright, FBI special Agent,
http://www.prisonplanet.com/FBI_agent_I_wa...error_probe.htm (http://www.prisonplanet.com/FBI_agent_I_was_stymied_in_terror_probe.htm)

Cynthia Mckinney (Representative D-GA) Grills Rumsfeld on wargames going on the morning of 9/11, he does not deny
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinn...ls_rumsfeld.htm (http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm)

Morgan Reynolds, (former chief economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term) says 911 Offical story is a fruad
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20...02755-6408r.htm (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-102755-6408r.htm)
http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds7.html
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44787


AND, Jimmy Walters the billionaire activist has gone so far as to, run commericals on televission, showing the evidence behinde building seven, and has also offered a $100,000 reward to any enginner who can proove that the towers fell the way they were said to have fallen in the offical story.

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/new...hp?storyid=1013 (http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1013)
September 11 conspiracy theorist offers prize - Reuters (http://reopen911.org/Yahoo!%20News%20-%20September%2011%20conspiracy%20theorist%20offers%20prize.htm)






Summary:


911 was such a cataclysmic event, it galvanized both the idiots and the intellectuals of America into a flag waving frenzy for nearly five years. 911 has become a never ending excuse to fight any war over seas, and implement any authoritarian rule domestically. Politicians were so quick to exploit this event, jumping in there tanks and battle suits while rushing 1000 page bills through the Senate and House. One has to wonder, why the knee jerk reaction of this attack was to shift into throwing a doublethink deception at the people, telling them to give up freedom for liberty before the smoke had yet to even clear from the air.

Giving up freedom for Liberty is a False Paradigm. No Liberty = Tyranny.

As the Roman judges used to say when a crime was committed, “key bono?”, or who benefits? The globalists who masterminded this attack want authoritarian control of America, invasion into uncontrolled Arab states, and overall a world climate that is so dangerous and unstable, the people will beg them for a one world government. A government ruled by them. Order out of chaos.

I've developed quite a case here, and I think my arguments are supported extremely well, even without all of my information on the towers; this is very strong evidence that we are being lied too, almost on a daily basis. Most of this literally proves the official story is a fraud and there's a lot of things I chose not to talk about, like 100s of Al-Queda and Taliban being flown out after 911, Insider trading right before 911, or Bush pulling FBI agents off of the Trail of the Bin Laden right before 911 (Edit: I did touch on that) and signing documents to protect them. However I've come to the conclusion that in this instance, the problem is there is actually TOO MUCH evidence here, so I won't even bother with the links for my last claims.

If you think I've made a compelling case, than I urge you learn more about this, because if I'm even remotely correct, and this New World Order aka the "Global Union" is created, by the same creatures who carried out this attack, I don't think your going to want to live under the tyranny grids they've constructed for you. I'm not charging the government with carrying this out, but these Rogue elements with tentacles into our government, who live in families who are worth five times as much as our countries annual budget. If you look more into this, I know you'll see that what I'm saying is true, this is what has happened with me. So please spread this thread around as much as you can, watch some of these movies I post at the bottom, PLEASE look into this more. I know when you find out what I'm saying is real, you'll fight it with even more compassion.

In the past only small pockets of people have had information on this subject, which served to cloak events in a protective secrecy. But lately a plethora of new information has been consolidated, creating an incredibly chaotic environment for the globalist where the risk of mass exposure is becoming very real. So once you learn, please spread this information on to others.

This is an information war, against elites with 90% of the wealth trying to control the political and financial systems to control mankind, and doing it for there own selfish desires. And information of this type is so much more powerful than any gun or grenade or tank or anything. Every single word we spew of resistance is a bullet, discharged from a chamber and sent into the heart of the New World Order Demon, and it will take a lot to kill it, but humanity will prevail.

911 Documentaries


Martial Law: 911 Rise of the Police State (The best damn 911 movie ever made)
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/images/march2005/040305martialcover.jpg
Windows Media Player:
Broadband:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmv

Dial up:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml56k.wmv

Stream:

Broadband:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmx

Dial up:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml56k.wmx

911- The Road To Tyranny (http://www.archive.org/movies/details-db.php?collection=independent_news&collectionid=911theRoadtoTyranny)

Paineful Deceptions
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 1 (pentagon) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part1.wmv)
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 2 (building 7 and the two towers) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part2.wmv)
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 3 (media propaganda) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part3.wmv)

The Masters of terror
2:00:09
http://thewebfairy.com/video/collected/Mas...ror_128KBps.wmv

911 Truth and Lies 4 parts

http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart1.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart2.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart3.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart4.wmv

Michael Parenti-Terrorism, Globalism and Conspiracy
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti1.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti2.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti3.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti4.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti5.wmv

Illuminazi 9-11
http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads/illuminazi.wmv

The Microchip
http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads/The%20Microchip.wmv

Free ebooks

The Secret Rituals of the O.T.O. (Illuminati, Templars, Freemasons, etc.).pdf (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/The%20Secret%20Rituals%20of%20the%20O.T.O.%20(Illuminati,%20Templars,%20Freemasons,%20etc.).pdf)
Order Out of Chaos - Paul Joseph Watson (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Order%20Out%20of%20Chaos%20-%20By%20Paul%20Joseph%20Watson.pdf)
A Chronological History of the New World Order - Denis Cuddy (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Chronological%20History%20of%20The%20New%20World%20Order%20-%20By%20Dennis%20Cuddy.pdf)
Conspiracy ebook - The New World Order - Milton William Cooper (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/conspiracy%20ebook%20-%20New%20World%20Order%20by%20Milton%20William%20Cooper.pdf)
Global Tyranny Step by Step - By WIlliam F. Jasper (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Global%20Tyranny%20Step%20By%20Step%20-%20By%20William%20F%20Jasper.pdf)


A shit load more Documentaries and ebooks can be found here (http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads.html)


Where's the cliff notes version? :lol:

[ziggyjuarez]

Ok, this is to all of the people who still believe 9/11 was the work of 19 Arabic Hijackers and an operation entirely masterminded by Osama Bin Laden, mainly because he hates our freedom’s and disagrees with American Liberalism. Despite all of their hard work, the United States Government simply could not see the attack coming.

When one considers all of the hardcore facts, there is no way this excuse holds even a grain of truth in it. The official story is impossible and simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Even more laughable is the excuse given by government officials that it was simply a "failure of intelligence" and the attack could not be averted. Politicians should not even form their mouths to even use an incompetence excuse. Warnings were received by the US by at least 18 other countries, and agents in the CIA, and the FBI were warned. The FAA got warnings too. In fact,

Prior Knowledge:

CIA had high-jacker details (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3516233.stm)
Taliban warned the US of huge attack (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2242594.stm)
FBI warned of plot to high-jack planes in 1995 (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/18/inv.hijacking.philippines/index.html)
FBI warned of Suspicious flight student last year (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/FOX%20NEWS_FBI%20Agent%20Warned%20of%20Suspicious%20Flight%20Students%20Last%20Summer.html)CIA ignorned warnings of Al-Queda (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/FINANCIAL%20TIMES_CIA%20'ignored%20warning'%20on%20al%20Qaeda.htm)
US knew of Suicide highjack threat in 1995 (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,47133,00.html)
The airlift of evil (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/MSNBC_The%20airlift%20of%20evil.htm)
Threat of US attacks passed Taliban weeks before the attacks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,556254,00.html)
US clamps secrecy on attacks before 911 (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/NEWS%20DAY_US%20Clamps%20Secrecy%20on%20Warnings%20Before%209-11.htm)


It seems that there were so many warnings, that


"The information provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of incompetence." Micheal Meacher, Tony Blairs former environmental advisor until 2003. London Guardian (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)

In addition to these Government officials and other people received individuals warnings as well. Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco was warned a full eight hours before the attack not to fly on 911, author Salmon Rushdie was publicly banned from flying before 911, and John Ashcroft former Attorney General stopped flying commercially six months before 911. Even some people working inside of the towers got instant messages, telling them to evacuate the WTC.

We must ask ourselves, where did all this prior knowledge come from, and why was it all ignored? Is it possible for that this much information of this magnitude of importance to get tangled up in a beaurecratic web of telephone lines? The answer is NO, people in side of the Trade Towers got INSTANT MESSAGES telling them the buildings were going to be destroyed two hours before it happened. You’re going to tell me someone can get an INSTANT MESSAGE to someone inside the World Trade Center two hours before the attack, but no one can get the message to the President of the United States? Impossible, this is the equivalent to saying people who work in the WTC have access to better inteligence than the president does. Someone calls up calls Mayor Willie Brown eight hours before the attack, and tells him not to fly, BUT THEY CAN'T CONTACT THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLERS AND WARN THEM AHEAD OF TIME?!??!

Sources:

Odigo Says Workers Were Warned of the Attack (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=77744&contrassID=/has%5C)
San Francisco Chronicle - Mayor Willie Brown got Low-Key Warning about Air Travel (http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_mnreport.shtml)
The Truth Seeker-Condi Lisa Rice Warned Willie Brown and Told him not to fly on 911 (http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1000)
CBS News - Ashcroft Flying High (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml)


In addition there are over 600 smoking gun holes and unanswered questions in the official story of 911; I'm only going to scratch the surface, w/ some of the main ones.

First thing is the NORAD stand down order.

"The first hijacking was suspected at not later than 8.20am, and the last hijacked aircraft crashed in Pennsylvania at 10.06am. Not a single fighter plane was scrambled to investigate from the US Andrews airforce base, just 10 miles from Washington DC, until after the third plane had hit the Pentagon at 9.38 am. Why not? There were standard FAA intercept procedures for hijacked aircraft before 9/11. Between September 2000 and June 2001 the US military launched fighter aircraft on 67 occasions to chase suspicious aircraft" (AP, August 13 2002)
guardian, once again (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)

NORAD completely stood down, this is a clear violation of FAA flight regulations, and NORAD could have probably stopped the attack, at least partially. The morning of 911 NORAD was training in a war game of flying hijacked aircrafts into buildings ON the Morning of 911. On the Morning of 911??!?! Yep, the drill stopped just 50 minutes before the Hi-Jacking began. No wonder there was no Military Response, NORAD was told that the planes being Hijacked were just part of a drill. That's why they stood down.

What are the chances of this happening? It's just a coincidence that they were running a war-game drill, mirroring the same monumental event to be documented in history books for centuries? Of course it’s possible, but very VERY unlikely.

This is so weird to have happened, and even weirder is the fact that this type of a wargame is going on the morning of 911. This type of event would be simmilar to seeing Oswald and the CIA training how to kill Kennedy in Dealy Plaza an hour before it happened.

Yahoo News - Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/YAHOO%20NEWS_Agency%20planned%20exercise%20on%20Sept%2011%20built%20around%20a%20plane%20crashing%20into%20a%20building.htm)
USA Today - NORAD has drills to use jets as weapons (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm)
Associated Press - Exercise built around crashing planes into buildings (http://www.boston.com/news/packages/sept11/anniversary/wire_stories/0903_plane_exercise.htm)



In addition, the list of the 19 hijackers and their picture identification was assembled and aired just hours after the attack. How do we jump to the accusations that 19 suspects are guilty of 3,000 American murders when most, if not all of the evidence, is twisted metal and degenerated ashes that used to be people? Actually by the time the hijackers had their mug shots aired on TV, all of the crime scenes had been destroyed. Buildings one and two collapsed, as well as the mysterious building seven collapsing on its own, the plane that hit the pentagon decentegrated, and flight 93 was likely shot down, hours later we miraculously post all of their mug shots on the news? Damn, we must be good.

So how exactly did the United States leap to their allegations of guilt?

A travel bag belonging to one of the 911 hijackers was found at the airport after the attacks, absolutely ruling beyond any doubt, that this was the work of Al-Queda.

Question: Why would a hijacker, planning to commit suicide, even BRING A BAG? Let alone pack it w/ incriminating evidence sure to unleash a fire storm of military hell on all of his fellow Mid Eastern people? The bag contained enough evidences to precisely tie the perpetrators to the Taliban and Al-Queda justify the assault in Afghanistan.


Answer: this is MANUFACTURED EVIDENCE


Now BBC has began running stories that many of these men have shown up as being still alive. The 911 Hijackers steal our planes to suicide attack us because were apparently not in sync with what the Qu'ran says, and then they show up still being alive. So that means that at least five of the men on the hi-jackers list cannot be the same men who were on the plane. But the government has stuck to their official story on this, and no one in the mainstream media has ever brought this up, or challenged them on it. Many of the hijackers are now appearing on television in their countries and professing their innocence. A lot of information like this has been circulating around other parts of the world, and it is likely part of the reason why America's image has dropped from negative to terrible. Most people in other countries know this is going on, but Americans are sleeping.


The Truth is unleashed in other parts of the world but it’s concealed from American eyes as a way to demonize Americans to the rest of the world, while American media demonizes the rest of the world (particularly Arabs) to America, this is a way of polarizing both side to inspire conflict on both sides.

Sources:


High JAck Suspects alive and well (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm)
High Jack Suspects Alive in Morroco (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1558669.stm)


Bombs in the Towers


http://www.prisonplanet.tv/images/may2004/050504collapse.jpg

___ This next part is important, because it's hardcore vissual evidence of government involvement in 9/11 and is nearly impossible to deny.

Building seven, first of all, was the third building to collapse within the World Trade Center Complex. According to the government’s official story, building seven was destroyed from fire, along with buildings one and two.

Videos Show Building 7's 6.5 second symmetrical collapse

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SMALL_wtc-7_1_.gif

First of all it’s important to say that fire has never once brought a steel structure down. Out of 100 uncontrolled fires in the last 50 years NEVER has fire collapsed a steel building, only earthquakes and explosives have been able to flatten these modern structures.

So, why is building seven so significant? It’s important because building seven collapsed without being struck by an airplane or anything else, almost as if it were the wind that knocked it over.

Several videos have been salvaged which show building seven's collapse and shocking evidence has surfaced from scrutiny.

CBS Broadcast of Buildinding Seven's fall - Dan Rather admits it looks like Explosives (http://www.wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc_7_cbs.mpg)
Building Seven's Collapase from a mile away (http://wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc7_collapse.mpg)
Building Seven's Colapse from 1000 feet away, this is very obvious (http://www.wtc7.net/vdocs/wtc7_collapse2.mpg)

You see, building seven DECENTEGRATED INTO RUBBLE in a vertical symmetrical fashion in 6.5 seconds. If building seven was taken down by an aircraft impact (even though it was not) it would have thrown back horizontally, transferring the energy away from the airplane impacts. And if it was fire, eventhough the flames would have had to have burnt exponentically hotter for a much longer time, we would have seen the structure reduced into liquid metal, and the streets would be a river of flame. But this building simply fell straight to the ground and crumbled.

I need to explain something about controlled demolition. First of all, when buildings are demolished the explosives are placed in the central column, so the structure falls inwards and does not damage other surrounding buildings. So they only way the building can fall like this or fall period is through the use of explosives.

THE FEMA REPORT ON WORLD TRADE CENTER 7 COLLAPSE IS A TOTAL JOKE. (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fema_report.html)

http://wtc7.net/docs/streamers.jpg

“Each of the following videos shows the entire visible portion of the building falling with a vertical precision otherwise seen only in controlled demolition. Moreover, they show that the collapse took only about 6.5 seconds from start to finish. That rate of fall is within a second of the time it would take an object to fall from the building's roof with no air resistance”

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/WTCDemol.jpg

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/WTC-bomb-frame048enhanced.jpg

BUT, building seven is even more important because the offical story of building seven collapse is because it was damaged from fire, HOWEVER, Larry Silverstine the owner of buildings one, two, and seven, got on televiosn on America Rebuilds on PBS, and slipped up, ADMITTING, THAT HE BLEW UP BUILDING SEVEN, He Said "WE PULLED THE BUILDING!" Here's the video from the PBS documentary.

http://infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV

Here's another clip where a demolitions expert describes "PULL IT" As a controlled demolition.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/pullit2.mp3

NOW, it's extremely important to mention that rigging buildins with explosives is a tiresom and very time consuming process, and to properly plant explosives in amathematicaly harmonious fasion to create a smooth symetrical drop. Actually it would take weeks to prepare for the demolition. So not only does Larry Silverstine, the owner of the complex admit to blowing up building seven, But building seven COULD NOT have been demolished on such short notice. Weeks of demolitions planning does not jive well with Osama's suprise attack. In fact it's impossible.

Another particularly important part of this is to note that Towers one, two, and seven have all of the 10 chartecteristics of a controlled demolition, a building collapseing from fire and plane impact damage having one of the charecteristics of controlled demolition is astronomically rare, the chances of this damage haveing all 10 charecteristics of a controlled demolition and not being a controled demolition is next to nil. These charecteristics 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.?

Source:

Professor David Ray Griffin
http://www.rbnlive.com/absentia_trial.html

Good lookin to Dem Bruce Lee Stylez, and his MIGHTY nine eleven thread right here (http://immortal-technique.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4020&st=0)

Historical Comparison

http://www.historyproject.net/images/vol01/28-1125a.jpg

----The Burning of the Reichstag



In 1933 Adolph Hitler wanted to seize dictotorial powers and turn Germany into a police state. So he set the massive governmental building on fire, that is known as the Reichstag (German Parliament) the blazing infernos sent the population into a state of petrified fear. Adolph Hitler and his party won by a landslide in the election just weeks later and later on was able to merge the Chancellor’s powers with that of the Presidents, and this is the origin of where his dictatorial power came from. Hitler also blamed the terrorist attack on the communists, and recived a pretext, or a reason, to attack them.


The real Pretext

Hitler’s conspiratorial tactic of burning the Reichstag to receive dictatorial power, and a pretext to attack his enemies is a method that is known as the Hegelian Dialectic, which is translated simply as problem, reaction, solution. The Hegelian Dialectic is a tactic that was developed by the 19th century German philosopher George Wilhelm Fredric Hegel. The way this works is, you create a crisis, the population is thrown into fear, and then you, the creator of the crisis, step in with a pre-organized solution, and pose as the savior. As soon as 911 occurred, literally while the smoke was still streaming from the building, politicians began targeting us with Doublethink approaches to get us to give up our freedom for security.

I don't want to digress too much, but this is important.

Doublethink is the practice of misrepresenting something bad as something good, such as pushing identity theft propaganda in order to get the people wanting a national ID card. This was the phrase coined in George Orwell's book 1984, which psychologically persuaded the population to relinquish there freedom unto big brother and simultaneously be happy about it. We see doublethink utilized daily by politicians.

The Hegelian Dialectic fused with the double think approach has given ruthless men an unbelievably effective tactic of power consolidation. But this time it's bigger,

http://www.redrat.net/BUSH_WAR/New-World-Order.jpg


PNAC(Project For a New American Centeury

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was founded by Dick Chenney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby and others in 2000. This is a pro-globalization neo-con think tank. On his website Dick Cheney lays out a Blueprint for America to invade many of it's neighbors and construct a "global command and control system" Cheney sites Syria, Libya, and North Korea as terrorist regimes, and uses their existence to justify invasions and restructuring there powers under a Pax America. It's strange, earlier in the year, Rumsfeld was selling Nuclear Reactors to North Korea. Now he's sitting in meetings at PNAC calling them a dangerous regime. HaHa, who made them more dangerous, Mr. Rumsfeld?
This document also mentions that public support would be very difficult to rally for these upcoming wars, and that a "Pearl Harbor Like Attack" would be very helpful. Now this is a public document, saying we need helpful Pearl Harbor attacks, that's motive, and practically admittance.

Sources:

PNAC offical site (http://www.newamericancentury.org/) read the documents.
Meacher talks about PNAC too (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/comment/0,12956,1036687,00.html)
Guardian UK - The Two Faces of Rumseld (http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,952289,00.html)

Not only this, but


"the US and the UK, are running dangerously low on hydrocarbon energy supplies. And by 2010 the Muslim world will control as much as 60% of the worlds oil production, and 95% of the remaining exportable oil. "

Protecting oil supplies in a crisis (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/937573.stm)
Taliban to Texas for Oil Talks (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/west_asia/36735.stm)
Bottom of the Barrel, the world is runnin out of oil, why do Politicans refuse to talk about it? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1097622,00.html)
Threats of US to strike Taliban weeks before the attacks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,556254,00.html)



Cui Bono(Who Benefits?)
Bush restricts 911 probes (http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/Web%20Pages/WASHINGTON%20POST_Bush%20Seeks%20To%20Restrict%20Hill%20Probes%20Of%20Sept%2011.htm)Top Taladan leader freed by US (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/09/wtal09.xml)
911 study hindered (http://www.sptimes.com/2002/05/09/Worldandnation/Graham__911_study_hin.shtml)
Bush trying to hide 911 information (http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/5993628.htm)
911 documents to sensitive for realse (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/27/bush.911/)
Bush discourages 911 investagations (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/)
Times of India - Bush took FBI agents off the Trail of Bin Ladens (http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/articleshow?art_id=1030259305)
Guardian UK - Agent Blasts FBI over 11 Sept 'cover up' (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,722426,00.html)


Goes on and on


Prominent 911 whistle blowers

One might wonder, if all of this evidence which literally swiss chesses the offical story being in existene, why has there not been more of an outcry about it? Well, there has, famous people all over the world have been questioning and exposeing the 911 coverup.

Micheal Meacher MP, former enviromental advisor in the British Government - This War on Terrorism is Bogus
former UK Government Minister speaks out about the standdown of NORAD on September 11th, PNAC and the pre-planned wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,...1036571,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1036571,00.html)
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/070204meacher.htm

Andre Van Buelow
Von Buelow is the former German Defense Minister and Minister of Technology. Von Buelow went public to say the US government carried out 9/11. His book is one of the bestsellers across Europe.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/021104vonbuelow.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/020804vonbuelow.html

Robert Wright, FBI special Agent,
http://www.prisonplanet.com/FBI_agent_I_wa...error_probe.htm (http://www.prisonplanet.com/FBI_agent_I_was_stymied_in_terror_probe.htm)

Cynthia Mckinney (Representative D-GA) Grills Rumsfeld on wargames going on the morning of 9/11, he does not deny
http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinn...ls_rumsfeld.htm (http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/mckinney_grills_rumsfeld.htm)

Morgan Reynolds, (former chief economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term) says 911 Offical story is a fruad
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20...02755-6408r.htm (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-102755-6408r.htm)
http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds7.html
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44787


AND, Jimmy Walters the billionaire activist has gone so far as to, run commericals on televission, showing the evidence behinde building seven, and has also offered a $100,000 reward to any enginner who can proove that the towers fell the way they were said to have fallen in the offical story.

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/new...hp?storyid=1013 (http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1013)
September 11 conspiracy theorist offers prize - Reuters (http://reopen911.org/Yahoo!%20News%20-%20September%2011%20conspiracy%20theorist%20offers%20prize.htm)






Summary:


911 was such a cataclysmic event, it galvanized both the idiots and the intellectuals of America into a flag waving frenzy for nearly five years. 911 has become a never ending excuse to fight any war over seas, and implement any authoritarian rule domestically. Politicians were so quick to exploit this event, jumping in there tanks and battle suits while rushing 1000 page bills through the Senate and House. One has to wonder, why the knee jerk reaction of this attack was to shift into throwing a doublethink deception at the people, telling them to give up freedom for liberty before the smoke had yet to even clear from the air.

Giving up freedom for Liberty is a False Paradigm. No Liberty = Tyranny.

As the Roman judges used to say when a crime was committed, “key bono?”, or who benefits? The globalists who masterminded this attack want authoritarian control of America, invasion into uncontrolled Arab states, and overall a world climate that is so dangerous and unstable, the people will beg them for a one world government. A government ruled by them. Order out of chaos.

I've developed quite a case here, and I think my arguments are supported extremely well, even without all of my information on the towers; this is very strong evidence that we are being lied too, almost on a daily basis. Most of this literally proves the official story is a fraud and there's a lot of things I chose not to talk about, like 100s of Al-Queda and Taliban being flown out after 911, Insider trading right before 911, or Bush pulling FBI agents off of the Trail of the Bin Laden right before 911 (Edit: I did touch on that) and signing documents to protect them. However I've come to the conclusion that in this instance, the problem is there is actually TOO MUCH evidence here, so I won't even bother with the links for my last claims.

If you think I've made a compelling case, than I urge you learn more about this, because if I'm even remotely correct, and this New World Order aka the "Global Union" is created, by the same creatures who carried out this attack, I don't think your going to want to live under the tyranny grids they've constructed for you. I'm not charging the government with carrying this out, but these Rogue elements with tentacles into our government, who live in families who are worth five times as much as our countries annual budget. If you look more into this, I know you'll see that what I'm saying is true, this is what has happened with me. So please spread this thread around as much as you can, watch some of these movies I post at the bottom, PLEASE look into this more. I know when you find out what I'm saying is real, you'll fight it with even more compassion.

In the past only small pockets of people have had information on this subject, which served to cloak events in a protective secrecy. But lately a plethora of new information has been consolidated, creating an incredibly chaotic environment for the globalist where the risk of mass exposure is becoming very real. So once you learn, please spread this information on to others.

This is an information war, against elites with 90% of the wealth trying to control the political and financial systems to control mankind, and doing it for there own selfish desires. And information of this type is so much more powerful than any gun or grenade or tank or anything. Every single word we spew of resistance is a bullet, discharged from a chamber and sent into the heart of the New World Order Demon, and it will take a lot to kill it, but humanity will prevail.

911 Documentaries


Martial Law: 911 Rise of the Police State (The best damn 911 movie ever made)
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/images/march2005/040305martialcover.jpg
Windows Media Player:
Broadband:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmv

Dial up:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml56k.wmv

Stream:

Broadband:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmx

Dial up:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml56k.wmx

911- The Road To Tyranny (http://www.archive.org/movies/details-db.php?collection=independent_news&collectionid=911theRoadtoTyranny)

Paineful Deceptions
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 1 (pentagon) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part1.wmv)
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 2 (building 7 and the two towers) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part2.wmv)
Painful Deceptions DVD Part 3 (media propaganda) (http://reopen911.org/video/painful_deceptions-an_analysis_of_the_911_attack_part3.wmv)

The Masters of terror
2:00:09
http://thewebfairy.com/video/collected/Mas...ror_128KBps.wmv

911 Truth and Lies 4 parts

http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart1.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart2.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart3.wmv
http://www.illuminaticonspiracy.org/files/...ndLiesPart4.wmv

Michael Parenti-Terrorism, Globalism and Conspiracy
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti1.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti2.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti3.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti4.wmv
http://www.workingtv.com/media5/parenti5.wmv

Illuminazi 9-11
http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads/illuminazi.wmv

The Microchip
http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads/The%20Microchip.wmv

Free ebooks

The Secret Rituals of the O.T.O. (Illuminati, Templars, Freemasons, etc.).pdf (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/The%20Secret%20Rituals%20of%20the%20O.T.O.%20(Illuminati,%20Templars,%20Freemasons,%20etc.).pdf)
Order Out of Chaos - Paul Joseph Watson (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Order%20Out%20of%20Chaos%20-%20By%20Paul%20Joseph%20Watson.pdf)
A Chronological History of the New World Order - Denis Cuddy (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Chronological%20History%20of%20The%20New%20World%20Order%20-%20By%20Dennis%20Cuddy.pdf)
Conspiracy ebook - The New World Order - Milton William Cooper (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/conspiracy%20ebook%20-%20New%20World%20Order%20by%20Milton%20William%20Cooper.pdf)
Global Tyranny Step by Step - By WIlliam F. Jasper (http://www.nwowatcher.com/ebooks/Global%20Tyranny%20Step%20By%20Step%20-%20By%20William%20F%20Jasper.pdf)


A shit load more Documentaries and ebooks can be found here (http://www.nwowatcher.com/downloads.html)


Where's the cliff notes version? :lol:
its not that long is it.I read it:shutup:

[Rat Faced]

There were also a lot of people with high flying friends and relatives that were told not to fly on the Lockerbie flight 15 or so years ago..

And no-ones ever explained how 20 plus FBI Agents were on the scene removing evidence within 1 hour of that crash... or even why they were allowed to, as they have no authority in the UK.

1 Hour for an International Flight, thats some doing... London-Lockerbie on a private Jet would be over 2.5 hours, considering the closest airfields are Carlisle or Glasgow.. :rolleyes:

Of course, there was a CIA guy on there that was returning unexpectedly with some urgent news that he wouldnt trust to the communication systems... about some CIA operation.



J2... you were the one i meant when i said "wouldnt watch it" :P

There was a TV interview of the owner saying that the firemen rang him and told him they were going to demolish building 7.. plus audio tapes of the firemen saying the fires were under control, plus video footage of controlled explosions demolishing the twin towers ;)

'Course, that could never be the case :ph34r:

[GepperRankins]

Still, even if this isnt one big conspiracy, why would they demo the 7th building?

Building 7 was destabilized by the falling towers, and, as I remember, fell by itself about 5pm on the 11th.
:lol: :lol:



you serious?

[Everose]

So let me try to understand this. America has a problem with listening to the FBI and CIA. We never listen when we should and when we do listen, we shouldn't have.

We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.


DAMNIT!!!! :lol:

[ziggyjuarez]

So let me try to understand this. America has a problem with listening to the FBI and CIA. We never listen when we should and when we do listen, we shouldn't have.

We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.


DAMNIT!!!!
:huh: watch the video again and my reply

[Rat Faced]

Thats the thing Everose... just like the rest of us.

Their Job is to protect us, so we should listen to them.

They also have other interests, such as protecting their own and their friends ass's... unfortunatly this often takes precedance for the ones in charge. (shit rises here, as in everywhere else)



We are all in a no-win situation... welcome to the real world ;)

[ziggyjuarez]

Thats the thing Everose... just like the rest of us.

Their Job is to protect us
Thats some hippy love shit.They dont give a shit about you.they do what the people above tell them.

[Smith]

Did you not see the pics, it was perfectally fine. Why would that building "fall" and the buildings right next to the trade towers not?

[Rat Faced]

Thats the thing Everose... just like the rest of us.

Their Job is to protect us
Thats some hippy love shit.They dont give a shit about you.they do what the people above tell them.


They also have other interests, such as protecting their own and their friends ass's... unfortunatly this often takes precedance for the ones in charge. (shit rises here, as in everywhere else)

Quote all of it, not just a part of it.

Read the whole, then see what i'm saying..

Can't do this from part of a post.. Tsk Tsk

[Busyman]

Thats the thing Everose... just like the rest of us.

Their Job is to protect us, so we should listen to them.

They also have other interests, such as protecting their own and their friends ass's... unfortunatly this often takes precedance for the ones in charge. (shit rises here, as in everywhere else)



We are all in a no-win situation... welcome to the real world ;)
Dominion Heresy. Look it up.

[ziggyjuarez]

Thats some hippy love shit.They dont give a shit about you.they do what the people above tell them.


They also have other interests, such as protecting their own and their friends ass's... unfortunatly this often takes precedance for the ones in charge. (shit rises here, as in everywhere else)

Quote all of it, not just a part of it.

Read the whole, then see what i'm saying..

Can't do this from part of a post.. Tsk Tsk
precedence (http://rds.yahoo.com/S=2766679/K=precedance/v=2/SID=w/l=WSPT/KC=precedence/;_ylt=AjX1d47RdN4gYutOp1bep8RXNyoA/SIG=158e0gh6o/EXP=1123529514/*-http%3A//search.yahoo.com/search?p=precedence&sp=1&toggle=1&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t-280&SpellState=n-729733595_q-jZOEzK%2FfES%2FdyE0FzeYI6QABAA%40%40)
you still making them look like the good guys.
Tsk Tsk Tsk:ermm:

[Rat Faced]

Precedence: Priority claimed or received because of preeminence or superiority...



So how is protecting their own and friends/bosses asses taking priority over doing what they are there for making them look good, exactly? :blink:

[ziggyjuarez]

Precedence: Priority claimed or received because of preeminence or superiority...



So how is protecting their own and friends/bosses asses taking priority over doing what they are there for making them look good, exactly? :blink:
Because it sounds like your making it out as if you think they only knew about it and protected their bosses.They helped in it. so saying



Their Job is to protect us, so we should listen to them

they could have stoped the whole thing.but that wasent apart of the plan.it was a goal not Precedence.

[GepperRankins]

i think he means thir job is supposed to be to protect us

[Everose]

:lol: Thank you for your welcome, RF, but I have been living in it and discouraged and frustrated by it for years now. I see very clearly that America is often singled out but often not alone in its foibles. And try as we may, I don't see any real change in the future. :(

Ziggy........I am sorry, I have read so many conspiracy theories about this And on the other side of the coin, I have read many articles that tear apart those theories bit by bit. One of my favorites was the Popular Mechanic article that Hobbes posted in here, as I felt it did address a lot of the issues and dispelled them. I guess we each have to read, compare, tear apart, and come up with our own conclusions. And that, fine sir, does take a lot of time. :frusty:

I don't take anything I read, hear or even see at face value anymore. I am a natural optimist who refuses to put her head in the sand. Sucks being me sometimes. :lol:

[Rat Faced]

US is often singled out, merely because they have the largest impact being the major player on the international scene.

I cant really think of any country that isnt affected by the same crap from their own Government/Security services. :(

[Everose]

Life sucks. Lets go have a beer. :D

[GepperRankins]

i'd love to see someone refute the WTC7 thing

[Everose]

If I remember right, Gepper, it was addressed in the Popular Mechanics article. But you will have to go look for it.........I can't be bothered. (thank you.......I have wanted to use the 'can't be bothered' phrase for some time...... :lol: ) Then you can let me know why you think their reasoning is wrong. ;) Unless you can't be bothered, in which case, I am cool with it. :D

[Skiz]

This vid has some interesting info on the trade center colapsing. Its very interesting, some stuff i never knew.

Well worth the download.


i'd love to see someone refute the WTC7 thing

This video gives consipracy theorists a bad name. Not since "Fahrenheit 9/11" have I seen such bombastic, utterly laughable garbage purporting to be "truth".

As for WTC 7? Watch the History Channel's presentation of Greatest Engineering Disasters in their Modern Marvels series and all of this is explained. There were no preplanted explosives or any other such nonsense.

[GepperRankins]

i'd love to see someone refute the WTC7 thing

This video gives consipracy theorists a bad name. Not since "Fahrenheit 9/11" have I seen such bombastic, utterly laughable garbage purporting to be "truth".

As for WTC 7? Watch the History Channel's presentation of Greatest Engineering Disasters in their Modern Marvels series and all of this is explained. There were no preplanted explosives or any other such nonsense.
anyone know where i can download this Greatest engineering disasters program?


i find it hard to believe a design flaw can make the owner and police lie, or make a building collapse in perfect fitting with controlled demolition because of small fires.

[Busyman]

i'd love to see someone refute the WTC7 thing

This video gives consipracy theorists a bad name. Not since "Fahrenheit 9/11" have I seen such bombastic, utterly laughable garbage purporting to be "truth".

As for WTC 7? Watch the History Channel's presentation of Greatest Engineering Disasters in their Modern Marvels series and all of this is explained. There were no preplanted explosives or any other such nonsense.
First rule of the internet...

When something is presented as fact it is fact.
There is no need for further research.
We've got the answer already, dumbshit.

[GepperRankins]

hey busy, i'm asking for sources to refute this. as far as i see it's impossible to make the building collapse like this. even if it was made out of wood (so fire could break it), it could not have collapsed so perfectly.


unlike others here. i like to see the whole story before deciding someone is wrong.

so does anyone have anything that says it didn't involve well placed explosives? republican blogs that call me crazy without confronting any accusations don't count

[Everose]

WTC 7 Collapse
CLAIM: Seven hours after the two towers fell, the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed. According to 911review.org: "The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators, the jury is in on this one."

FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."

WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors--along with the building's unusual construction--were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.



This is from the Popular Mechanics 'Debunking the Myths' article, Gepper. They consulted 300 experts for their article, and listed them at the end. I am not convinced anyone is an 'expert' at what happens when planes fly into buildings, though, as most experts become that way based on experience, and these experts don't have much but hypothesis. After reading the whole article, though, I think they have more experience in these things than the people writing the conspiracy articles. But to each his own. :)

[ziggyjuarez]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SMALL_wtc-7_1_.gif

A chain-reaction collapse just doesnt go down like this.Nice read Everose but i still dont think it dissproves everything.

You can find more stuff here: http://www.conspiracyvideos.com/site/content.php?article.64.1

[GepperRankins]

WTC 7 Collapse
CLAIM: Seven hours after the two towers fell, the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed. According to 911review.org: "The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators, the jury is in on this one."

FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."

WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors--along with the building's unusual construction--were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.



This is from the Popular Mechanics 'Debunking the Myths' article, Gepper. They consulted 300 experts for their article, and listed them at the end. I am not convinced anyone is an 'expert' at what happens when planes fly into buildings, though, as most experts become that way based on experience, and these experts don't have much but hypothesis. After reading the whole article, though, I think they have more experience in these things than the people writing the conspiracy articles. But to each his own. :)
interesting read, but i don't believe it. i've heard that fire can weaken the metal, but not that much. remember out of about 100 tall steel buildings that have been on fire none have collapsed. i don't think there really was 25% "scooped out" of a third of the building, how the hell would they work this out, the many cameras didn't see it and i didn't see any sources to say how they knew this. even if fire and this missing section could cause the building to collapse, i doubt it could fall so neatly, and i doubt the building owner would lie about having it pulled down

[Everose]

Nah, but thanks, Robs. Been to a lot of sites, read a lot of different conspiracy theories. Took some seriously, laughed at others.

[BigBank_Hank]

The afternoon of the morning the WTC gets decked, and this guy (who was, no doubt, a close personal friend of George Bush) has the wherewithal and foresight to round up a demolition crew (after all, they were just sitting around doing nothing, on 9fucking11) and pull together an act that would take weeks under any other circumstances, and knock his fucking building down.

Unreal.

After four years, you are still addicted to the smell of bullshit.

This is the most cockeyed conspiracy that has yet arisen from 9/11.

You know, if all of the events of 9/11 are the result of this conspiracy you put all your stock in, that means that Bush and the U.S. government control Al Qaeda, which in turn means that, ipso facto, diddly-doo, presto-chango, Bush and the U.S. (with a little hands-on help from Al Qaeda, and the willfully averted gaze of Tony Blair) are responsible for 7/7 and 7/21, not to mention 3/11, or whatever it was in Madrid.

It's a good thing your choir doesn't actually sing; you lot couldn't hit a right note to save your asses.
Umm wow I don’t think that I’ve ever seen J2 this fired up.

I originally didn’t post in this thread because I knew that the same thing would happen to me. No matter how hard you may try to get people to see things that are right in front of them if they don’t want to see it they never will.

[Busyman]

interesting read, but i don't believe it. i've heard that fire can weaken the metal, but not that much. remember out of about 100 tall steel buildings that have been on fire none have collapsed. i don't think there really was 25% "scooped out" of a third of the building, how the hell would they work this out, the many cameras didn't see it and i didn't see any sources to say how they knew this. even if fire and this missing section could cause the building to collapse, i doubt it could fall so neatly, and i doubt the building owner would lie about having it pulled down

Oh, absolutely, Dave.

The afternoon of the morning the WTC gets decked, and this guy (who was, no doubt, a close personal friend of George Bush) has the wherewithal and foresight to round up a demolition crew (after all, they were just sitting around doing nothing, on 9fucking11) and pull together an act that would take weeks under any other circumstances, and knock his fucking building down.

Unreal.

After four years, you are still addicted to the smell of bullshit.

This is the most cockeyed conspiracy that has yet arisen from 9/11.

You know, if all of the events of 9/11 are the result of this conspiracy you put all your stock in, that means that Bush and the U.S. government control Al Qaeda, which in turn means that, ipso facto, diddly-doo, presto-chango, Bush and the U.S. (with a little hands-on help from Al Qaeda, and the willfully averted gaze of Tony Blair) are responsible for 7/7 and 7/21, not to mention 3/11, or whatever it was in Madrid.

It's a good thing your choir doesn't actually sing; you lot couldn't hit a right note to save your asses.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Come on, sing along gang!!!

:yahoo: I Lovvvvvve Google!!!! :yahoo:

[Tikibonbon]

If Dave gets to be a demolishion expert online, I want to be a gynocoligist.

Hey Everose, com'r woman.....

[GepperRankins]

Oh, absolutely, Dave.

The afternoon of the morning the WTC gets decked, and this guy (who was, no doubt, a close personal friend of George Bush) has the wherewithal and foresight to round up a demolition crew (after all, they were just sitting around doing nothing, on 9fucking11) and pull together an act that would take weeks under any other circumstances, and knock his fucking building down.

Unreal.

After four years, you are still addicted to the smell of bullshit.

This is the most cockeyed conspiracy that has yet arisen from 9/11.

You know, if all of the events of 9/11 are the result of this conspiracy you put all your stock in, that means that Bush and the U.S. government control Al Qaeda, which in turn means that, ipso facto, diddly-doo, presto-chango, Bush and the U.S. (with a little hands-on help from Al Qaeda, and the willfully averted gaze of Tony Blair) are responsible for 7/7 and 7/21, not to mention 3/11, or whatever it was in Madrid.

It's a good thing your choir doesn't actually sing; you lot couldn't hit a right note to save your asses.



you kind of missed the point. which is, the building was rigged before september 11th.


the bush government created the modern al qaida that's responsible for all those attacks you mentioned, so whether they were false flags set up by the US government or they were by small groups of extremists. the US caused it by your so called retaliation to september 11th


so the lot of you can put away the champaign and the lube because you only agreed with me in that post

[Rat Faced]

interesting read, but i don't believe it. i've heard that fire can weaken the metal, but not that much. remember out of about 100 tall steel buildings that have been on fire none have collapsed. i don't think there really was 25% "scooped out" of a third of the building, how the hell would they work this out, the many cameras didn't see it and i didn't see any sources to say how they knew this. even if fire and this missing section could cause the building to collapse, i doubt it could fall so neatly, and i doubt the building owner would lie about having it pulled down

Oh, absolutely, Dave.

The afternoon of the morning the WTC gets decked, and this guy (who was, no doubt, a close personal friend of George Bush) has the wherewithal and foresight to round up a demolition crew (after all, they were just sitting around doing nothing, on 9fucking11) and pull together an act that would take weeks under any other circumstances, and knock his fucking building down.
Unreal.

After four years, you are still addicted to the smell of bullshit.

This is the most cockeyed conspiracy that has yet arisen from 9/11.

You know, if all of the events of 9/11 are the result of this conspiracy you put all your stock in, that means that Bush and the U.S. government control Al Qaeda, which in turn means that, ipso facto, diddly-doo, presto-chango, Bush and the U.S. (with a little hands-on help from Al Qaeda, and the willfully averted gaze of Tony Blair) are responsible for 7/7 and 7/21, not to mention 3/11, or whatever it was in Madrid.

It's a good thing your choir doesn't actually sing; you lot couldn't hit a right note to save your asses.

J2,

The video on the start of this thread has the owner and the firemen teling us on camera, that they demolished the building delibratly.

Doesnt matter what the "experts" say in this case... its a proven fact in court too.. it was delibratly demolished. See the Insurance Claims case.

Can i therefore thank you for your input, that the charges would need to be placed before 911.

I thank you for your change of stance on this, due to your refusal to accept anything that you dont agree with, including taped interviews with the owner/firemen on the subject, as evidence.

Nice to see that, due to the acknowledged legal evidence, and proven facts in court... you are now one of the conspiracy theorists. :)

Edit:

Shame Hank was so obtuse in his reply, it could be read as either agreeing with or disagreeing with J2 on this issue.

Maybe he actually watched the TV Interviews before commenting on them, unlike wor kev.. ;)

[GepperRankins]

http://moderation.invisionzone.com/style_emoticons/default/glag.gif


consider yourself well and truly out pissed J2.

[Cheese]

My opinion is still out on this. But, unlike some of the lamers in this thread, I have watched this video.

[Skiz]

its a proven fact in court too

Proof?


See the Insurance Claims case.

Proof?


...the charges would need to be placed before 911.

Proof?

[GepperRankins]

they could get away with admitting demolition, but they don't try it.


if i was evil, i'd say "because of the sensitive nature of the information held within the building it was designed to be destroyed quickly incase of invasion or coup attempts" but nooooo

[GepperRankins]

Proof?


See the Insurance Claims case.

Proof?


...the charges would need to be placed before 911.

Proof?
have you watched the video?

[Cheese]

Proof?



Proof?


...the charges would need to be placed before 911.

Proof?
have you watched the video?

Doubtful. If you watch the video then the terrorists win.

[Barbarossa]

My opinion is still out on this. But, unlike some of the lamers in this thread, I have watched this video.

I haven't got time to watch the video, but I gather it's something to do with claims that WTC7 was deliberately demolished, with explosive charges that were planted prior to 9/11...?

But does it explain...


WHY? :unsure:

[Skiz]

have you watched the video?

Yes. I thought that would have evident by my previous posts.

The information I'm looking for is proof, not a conspiracy theorist yelling into a microphone on the street saying it to be so. Heck, I've seen the homeless doing that. ;)

[manker]

My opinion is still out on this. But, unlike some of the lamers in this thread, I have watched this video.

I haven't got time to watch the video, but I gather it's something to do with claims that WTC7 was deliberately demolished, with explosive charges that were planted prior to 9/11...?

But does it explain...


WHY? :unsure:I haven't watched the video either but that doesn't seem a pre-requisite in this thread.

I expect the charges were to ensure that the buildings fell in a regular fashion so as not to tumble into adjacent buildings, which would cause even more loss of life.

[Cheese]

have you watched the video?

Yes. I thought that would have evident by my previous posts.

The information I'm looking for is proof, not a conspiracy theorist yelling into a microphone on the street saying it to be so. Heck, I've seen the homeless doing that. ;)

That's not how the evidence was presented in the video though. Which suggests to me that you didn't watch it or that you are engaging in a similar tactic to that you deplore in that you are just shouting "Conspiracy Nuts!" at the top of your voice (perhaps into a microphone) as your only defence.

Heck, I've seen children doing that.

[Cheese]

I haven't got time to watch the video, but I gather it's something to do with claims that WTC7 was deliberately demolished, with explosive charges that were planted prior to 9/11...?

But does it explain...


WHY? :unsure:I haven't watched the video either but that doesn't seem a pre-requisite in this thread.

I expect the charges were to ensure that the buildings fell in a regular fashion so as not to tumble into adjacent buildings, which would cause even more loss of life.

Lamers.:ermm:

[GepperRankins]

I haven't got time to watch the video, but I gather it's something to do with claims that WTC7 was deliberately demolished, with explosive charges that were planted prior to 9/11...?

But does it explain...


WHY? :unsure:I haven't watched the video either but that doesn't seem a pre-requisite in this thread.

I expect the charges were to ensure that the buildings fell in a regular fashion so as not to tumble into adjacent buildings, which would cause even more loss of life.
one thing is, the building wouldn't have fallen. another is, like J2 said it would have taken quite some time to set it up to be demolished, so the charges must have been set before september 11th

[manker]

I haven't watched the video either but that doesn't seem a pre-requisite in this thread.

I expect the charges were to ensure that the buildings fell in a regular fashion so as not to tumble into adjacent buildings, which would cause even more loss of life.
one thing is, the building wouldn't have fallen. another is, like J2 said it would have taken quite some time to set it up to be demolished, so the charges must have been set before september 11thQuite. Altho' how can anyone be absolutely sure that they wouldn't have fallen.

Maybe lots of tall buildings also have charges in them to detonate if they look as if they're about to fall into other buildings :unsure:

[GepperRankins]

one thing is, the building wouldn't have fallen. another is, like J2 said it would have taken quite some time to set it up to be demolished, so the charges must have been set before september 11thQuite. Altho' how can anyone be absolutely sure that they wouldn't have fallen.

Maybe lots of tall buildings also have charges in them to detonate if they look as if they're about to fall into other buildings :unsure:
maybe they do, if so why is no-one using this as a defense?

[Barbarossa]

If you're going to topple a building deliberately, and make it look like an accident, surely you'd set the charges so that it WOULDN'T look like a controlled explosion? :unsure:

[manker]

Quite. Altho' how can anyone be absolutely sure that they wouldn't have fallen.

Maybe lots of tall buildings also have charges in them to detonate if they look as if they're about to fall into other buildings :unsure:
maybe they do, if so why is no-one using this as a defense?Maybe it's classified.

If this was common knowledge then perhaps terrorists would seek to exploit it in other tall buildings.

This might be impossible, however, the public would panic if the right figurative buttons were pushed by harbingers of doom.

[Barbarossa]

Someone here agrees with you!!

http://www.rense.com/general48/chargesplacedinWTC.htm

:ohmy: :ohmy: :ohmy:

[GepperRankins]

if it was possible i think the terrorists would no all about it

[manker]

if it was possible i think the terrorists would no all about itYeah, but that wasn't really my point.

What I'm saying is that there might be a load of 'public interest' reasons for not officially confirming that tall buildings often have explosive charges in them.

For example, it might be in the public's interest not to have it officially confirmed that office workers in Canary Wharf are sitting on a fucking great bomb each day that they go to work.

[GepperRankins]

Someone here agrees with you!!

http://www.rense.com/general48/chargesplacedinWTC.htm

:ohmy: :ohmy: :ohmy:
makes sense, after my reality filter went to work on it.

kinda badly written. not to say that a labourer should be able to write like a republican, like


the twin towers fell like this theory would suggest (crumbling from the top down), but tower 7 collapsed from the bottom up.

[Helghast004]

After reading all that...I dont give a damn...

To me its just another conspiracy about yet another major event in history. From the Holocaust to the Moon landings. What I saw was a terrorist attack in our soil and thats it.

"Aw man you've been trapped in government propaganda!" yeah whatever...

I dont like the way this guy spreads his opinion on to others either. On point where he walks off as if to say "I dont give a damn about your opinion."

Ah well.

[GepperRankins]

he's just a bit hyperactive. can't really hold it against him. especially when you look at the case he's making not just the slightly mental public display he's making

[ziggyjuarez]

After reading all that...I dont give a damn...

To me its just another conspiracy about yet another major event in history. From the Holocaust to the Moon landings. What I saw was a terrorist attack in our soil and thats it.

"Aw man you've been trapped in government propaganda!" yeah whatever...

I dont like the way this guy spreads his opinion on to others either. On point where he walks off as if to say "I dont give a damn about your opinion."

Ah well.
Its worth looking into.The guy in the video is very creditable and well known.Dont just pass him off as a conspiracy nut.He uncovered the bohemian Grove and stuff like this gives him credit.If your into it,look into if,if youre not then say your not,dont just pass it off just because its not on CNN...

[Helghast004]

After reading all that...I dont give a damn...

To me its just another conspiracy about yet another major event in history. From the Holocaust to the Moon landings. What I saw was a terrorist attack in our soil and thats it.

"Aw man you've been trapped in government propaganda!" yeah whatever...

I dont like the way this guy spreads his opinion on to others either. On point where he walks off as if to say "I dont give a damn about your opinion."

Ah well.
Its worth looking into.The guy in the video is very creditable and well known.Dont just pass him off as a conspiracy nut.He uncovered the bohemian Grove and stuff like this gives him credit.If your into it,look into if,if youre not then say your not,dont just pass it off just because its not on CNN...

Im not passing it off just because I didnt see it on CNN or anyother news network for the matter.

I cant really explain what I feel at the moment, without having a major backlash of harmful comments sent against me, or perhaps its the fetigue of laying down wood flooring all day? :dry:

Debate among this yourselves...though in the many topics I've posted in many different forums. This one really pisses me off if you will...I'll let you guys handel this with your proper english and grammar, im not known to use it correctly :lookaroun

If its true and the word gets out then great! we've exposed the horrible truth about the government.

One thing still puzzles me...they planned to demolish the building during such a busy day and without barricades to hold back bystanders?

As with most topics I know little about or have no answers too. I'll avoid this topic and leave to you guys. :shifty:

[ziggyjuarez]

Good.Continue manker...

[lynx]

It's interesting how all the "heat" seems to have been taken off what happened at the Pentagon. Here's a snippet from Popular Mechanics, in their "debunking" of the theory that it wasn't a 757 which hit that building, with my comments in red.


Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. Strange, because if you look at the impact of the planes into WTC 1 & 2 that's exactly what happened. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns the load bearing columns are inside the building, how would this affect the size of the hole made on the outside of the building?, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. Sozen seems to be suggesting that under impact conditions solids behave more like liquids. On the contrary, under high speed impact liquids actually behave more like solids since they can't flow out of the way. What he is suggesting is just nonsense. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen." Well, he actually got that bit right, it didn't happen

I've seen a soft tallow candle fired at a group of concrete building blocks, it went straight through the first two and was embedded in the third. The hole in the first block was as neat as if it had been drilled. The impact speed was about 250mph, far slower than the impacts of 9/11. Is this guy really expecting people to believe that hardened aluminium is going to fold up like butter while a candle with a consistency not unlike butter acts like hardened metal?

He is trying to tell us that the nose hit first, but rather than that part of the aircraft slowing down, it is the wings which haven't yet hit anything which just fold back of their own accord. Obviously, being the Pentagon, it must be shielded by invisible metal bending rays.

If that's the best that PM can come up with regarding what happened at the Pentagon, it casts doubt on anything they come up with in respect to the events of 9/11.

[Barbarossa]

Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm) has got an article on the "Pentagon impact not a 757" conspiracy theory (Verdict - False), but oddly enough there is nothing (yet) on the WTC7 theory...

...which surprises me.. Snopes doesn't usually let me down... :unsure:

[GepperRankins]

Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm) has got an article on the "Pentagon impact not a 757" conspiracy theory (Verdict - False), but oddly enough there is nothing (yet) on the WTC7 theory...

...which surprises me.. Snopes doesn't usually let me down... :unsure:
i think lynx detective work pwns that rebuttle. it would have punched a hole or splatted on the wall, meaning there was some left outside. where's the wing that sheered off anyway?

[Barbarossa]

Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm) has got an article on the "Pentagon impact not a 757" conspiracy theory (Verdict - False), but oddly enough there is nothing (yet) on the WTC7 theory...

...which surprises me.. Snopes doesn't usually let me down... :unsure:
i think lynx detective work pwns that rebuttle. it would have punched a hole or splatted on the wall, meaning there was some left outside. where's the wing that sheered off anyway?

You have the nerve to ask about a wing???

Fine. In the other scenario, the one in which a 757 DIDN'T hit the Pentagon, I'm going to ask "Where's the fucking plane??"

At 8:20 AM, American Airlines flight 77 took off from Dulles International Airport with 64 people on board. If it didn't crash into the Pentagon - Where did it go?? :ermm:

[lynx]

Careful Dave, you seem to be assuming that just because the explanation is rubbish, then the opposite viewpoint must be true, but that's not the case.

If it was a 757 but it had been damaged beforehand that could explain why there was a missing wing and also why the hole was not as large as might be expected. Or course, if it was damaged in such a way that would open the question as to how the damage had occurred, and that might be just as embarrassing to the US government.

Edit: I would add one comment though.
Why would you ask a structural engineer (who by definition deals with static structures) to comment on high speed impacts, a subject totally outside his field of expertise?

[Cheese]

i think lynx detective work pwns that rebuttle. it would have punched a hole or splatted on the wall, meaning there was some left outside. where's the wing that sheered off anyway?

You have the nerve to ask about a wing???

Fine. In the other scenario, the one in which a 757 DIDN'T hit the Pentagon, I'm going to ask "Where's the fucking plane??"

At 8:20 AM, American Airlines flight 77 took off from Dulles International Airport with 64 people on board. If it didn't crash into the Pentagon - Where did it go?? :ermm:

After a somewhat mysterious sequence of events, they crashed on what appeared to be a deserted island. The chance of being found and rescued were fairly small, so the survivors had to cope with a set of challenges. They had to learn to survive on the island, a mysterious place with enough dangers on it's own. Also, they had to learn to live with each other if any success was to be expected. And finally, they had to live with themselves and their pasts.

Lost. Coming soon to Channel Four.

[Barbarossa]

Very comprehensive, impartial site here, if anyone is still interested...

http://911research.com/

[Rat Faced]

In the "Conspiracies" series, they decided that a 757 did hit the Pentagon, so that conspiracy theory was crap.

They couldnt debunk the WTC conspiracies, as there were just too many coincidences plus the fact the twin towers was designed to survive multiple crashes of that sort etc etc.. however, they couldnt support the Governmnet version either, so they had a "Jury still out" verdict.

The 4th plane they decided was almost certainly shot down, and the conspiracy theorists were right.

The thing about that 4th one for me is... why the hell cover it up? I dont think anyone, under the circumstances, would question the decision to shoot the thing down.. the only thing gained by covering it up, is to open more questions into the other planes. :unsure:


Unfortunatly, i cant recall offhand all the arguments used in the program for and against the conspiracy theories.. but meh, im sure other Brits watch the program.

[RioDeLeo]

To claim a 757 didn't crash into the Pentagon is utter crap, People saw it, bits of it were found, if it didn't crash, where the fuck is it? Also, this is no ordinary building, this is the Pentagon. Aeroplanes are very weak, if they were built to be any stronger they wouldn't fly, ask anyone who has ever sat by a window and watched the wings flex and move about. Crashing into the Pentagon at that speed would, and did, leave a very small hole, around 15 feet across, the size of the fuselage.

For those who believe no bits of aircraft were found, you're wrong, they found heaps, have a look here, for example >> Bits of the 757 (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html)

Conspiracy theories are good for a laugh, and that's what most of them are, laughable, especially this one.

[Rat Faced]

There are other questions though..

Why aim for a virtually vacant section of the building undergoing refurbishment, meaning you have to virtually double back in the direction the plane was going (I think they had to turn 270 Degrees or something like that). If they'd just crashed in the original direction there would have been 1000's of fatalities, possibly including Rumsfeld...

How can you be so accurate as to get a bullseye on the only occupied part of that vacant section... virtually wiping out Naval Intelligence. (Maybe they just REALLY hated the Navy? :P )

Why suppress the video footage of the crash taken by business in the area, and only release a few stills?


Its almost like they wanted to fuel the stupid conspiracy theory re: it wasnt a plane.. Go Figure.. :lol:

[neon]

But fuck the mass media it’s lame like leprosy// it’s faker then a fame seeking celebrity// just turn the news off it’s just bs Government propaganda complicity// here’s one thing they don’t talk about, it was covered up instantly// it’s not given any air-time although the government say “it’s collapse is a mystery”// Cus it was hit by no plane// but at 5:20pm still fell all the same// 6.5 seconds straight down playing gravity, like it's a game// the 47 story collapse of WTC 7 is the name// to this lil rhyme that’s got no ticket to fame// cus the mass media has been locked down all the same// by the Bush-government who can not take the blame// cus that would be un-patriotic for a county that’s vain// despite the fact that the building had a CIA domain// with bullet proof windows on two floors// internal air and water supply, Iris scan doors// a sophisticated building with really no engineering flaws//
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SMALL_wtc-7_1_.gif(WTC7)
[color=blue]The truth is 9/11 was a messy inside job, they fucked up at every stage// like the wrong house busted in a police drug raid// with clues literally littered everywhere like a ticker-tape parade// but the propaganda so skilfully conducted using the power the media has to persuade// switching the peoples attention to fanatical Islamists like a mixer cross-fade!

Yeah you know what's up man.

It WAS a staged event. The evidence is all there
and the government STILL hasent gove a Offical/true explanation for the events.

You need to be skooled if you think otherwise, you need to tape :shutup: ya mouth shut if your following the lies. get the fuck outta here.. you played

[neon]

Very comprehensive, impartial site here, if anyone is still interested...

http://911research.com/


http://www.reopen911.org/
^^ another site.

[lynx]

To claim a 757 didn't crash into the Pentagon is utter crap, People saw it, bits of it were found, if it didn't crash, where the fuck is it? Also, this is no ordinary building, this is the Pentagon. Aeroplanes are very weak, if they were built to be any stronger they wouldn't fly, ask anyone who has ever sat by a window and watched the wings flex and move about. Crashing into the Pentagon at that speed would, and did, leave a very small hole, around 15 feet across, the size of the fuselage.

For those who believe no bits of aircraft were found, you're wrong, they found heaps, have a look here, for example >> Bits of the 757 (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html)

Conspiracy theories are good for a laugh, and that's what most of them are, laughable, especially this one.I should begin by pointing out that the link you referred to itself continually refers to the work done by Perdue University. I'm sure some of it is very valid in building design, but when you examine the credentials of those involved not one has any acknowledged experience of high speed impacts. Their aim was to produce an animation of what they believed might have happened, and for them (abovetopsecret) to subsequently produce this as evidence of what actually happened is disgraceful.

Actually, it left a hole 75 feet across in the outer wall. The smaller hole was in Ring C, in other words after going through the outer and inner walls of the Ring E and Ring D at the very least, I don't think anyone would seriously expect that the full aircraft would get so far. But if you want to knock down a theory, what better way than to misrepresent it?

You are wrong about aircraft being weak, the wings are designed to flex, it is part of what gives the aircraft it's stability in turbulent air. If the wings were so weak as you claim, how could they able to support the full weight of the aircraft, at maximum takeoff weight 123.6 tonnes (not the out of date 115.7 tonnes stated in your link)? By comparison, it is the fuselage which is relatively weak, yet this is supposedly the part which has punched through the walls but left the wings behind.

The guy who wrote that report (Mete Sozen) assumed that metal will bend, just as it does in an automobile accident. But at the speeds involved there's one slight problem with that assumption. The metal simply does not have time to bend. But that's what you get when you ask an expert on static structures to explain the effect of a high speed impact. Unless of course you want the wrong conclusion to be drawn.

At best the wing will shear off. And if it shears off then there is nothing to draw it into the hole made by the fuselage, instead it will keep going in a straight line and therefore must either make its own hole or be left outside. There is no evidence it did either, so the correct assumption is that either it wasn't a 757, or that part or all of the wing was absent at the time of impact.

Another point, the aircraft fuel is held in the wings. What happened to 25 tonnes of jet fuel? If the wings were left outside there would have been a massive fireball visible over a great distance, but no-one reported any such thing. If the wings were drawn into the Pentagon the fire inside would have massively more intense and there would have been a lot more casualties.

Now I'm not saying that it wasn't a 757, I'm suggesting it wasn't a complete 757. The missing frames on the Pentagon video have been held up as "evidence" that there is a cover up, and that the plane wasn't a 757. But it could just as easily be that they are hiding damage on the 757. If they were avoiding jet fighters it could also explain why they missed the Pentagon and had to "go around".

[JPaul]

You need to be skooled if you think otherwise, you need to tape :shutup: ya mouth shut if your following the lies. get the fuck outta here.. you played
I am pleased to report I have absolutely no idea what that means.

Can someone translate, or is it worth the bother.

[Rat Faced]

You need to be skooled if you think otherwise, you need to tape :shutup: ya mouth shut if your following the lies. get the fuck outta here.. you played
I am pleased to report I have absolutely no idea what that means.

Can someone translate, or is it worth the bother.

Sorry, dont speak gobbledegook or double dutch :lookaroun

[Everose]

Careful Dave, you seem to be assuming that just because the explanation is rubbish, then the opposite viewpoint must be true, but that's not the case.

If it was a 757 but it had been damaged beforehand that could explain why there was a missing wing and also why the hole was not as large as might be expected. Or course, if it was damaged in such a way that would open the question as to how the damage had occurred, and that might be just as embarrassing to the US government.

Edit: I would add one comment though.
Why would you ask a structural engineer (who by definition deals with static structures) to comment on high speed impacts, a subject totally outside his field of expertise?


Flight 77 Debris
CLAIM: Conspiracy theorists insist there was no plane wreckage at the Pentagon. "In reality, a Boeing 757 was never found," claims pentagonstrike.co.uk, which asks the question, "What hit the Pentagon on 9/11?"

FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"


I guess we all think differently on this. To me a structural engineer can definitely have areas of expertise.

And on the WTC7 building.........I decided against the conspiracy theories when I realized this Larry Silverstein has never owned this building. A 99 year lease from the New York Port Authority by Silverstein Properties, Inc. doesn't constitute ownership to me. And that being the case......what right would he have to even think of demolishing?

As far as his remark about 'pulling and standing back and watching the building demolish?' Firefighters always talk about pulling. In their terms, it means not fighting the fire.....pulling away from.........letting it go...letting the fire do the pulling down.

I guess we all have to go with our own common sense....what makes sense to us.

[GepperRankins]

"pull out" might mean leave the fires to burn. "pull it" doesn't sound right.

i wonder what "the fires were out" and "there was definately a second explosion" mean in firemans speak :unsure:

[Everose]

Oft times firemen think the fires were out, Gepper. Many times they are called back to a fire after many hours of such thinking. I have seen it happen more than once myself and this could cause another explosion, imo.

[whypikonme]

... not one has any acknowledged experience of high speed impacts. .

Unloke you, of course, who no doubt studied this at uni?

This conspiracy nonsense is a joke, a 757 flew into the Pentagon -- full stop. People saw it, they found the plane, and the black box, and the passengers and crew.

This is schoolboy stuff.

[GepperRankins]

... not one has any acknowledged experience of high speed impacts. .

Unloke you, of course, who no doubt studied this at uni?

This conspiracy nonsense is a joke, a 757 flew into the Pentagon -- full stop. People saw it, they found the plane, and the black box, and the passengers and crew.

This is schoolboy stuff.
people also saw cruise missiles, hercules militery planes, light aircraft, and unmanned drones

[lynx]

FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"


I guess we all think differently on this. To me a structural engineer can definitely have areas of expertise.

And on the WTC7 building.........I decided against the conspiracy theories when I realized this Larry Silverstein has never owned this building. A 99 year lease from the New York Port Authority by Silverstein Properties, Inc. doesn't constitute ownership to me. And that being the case......what right would he have to even think of demolishing?

As far as his remark about 'pulling and standing back and watching the building demolish?' Firefighters always talk about pulling. In their terms, it means not fighting the fire.....pulling away from.........letting it go...letting the fire do the pulling down.

I guess we all have to go with our own common sense....what makes sense to us.

"I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box."

First of all, there are 2 "black boxes", the Flight Data Recorder and the Cockpit Voice Recorder, and he didn't find either of them, they were recovered by members of the Fairfax county search and rescue team. Secondly, how did he hold the tail section in his hand? It weighs several tonnes.

Now for his second (or is it his third) lie.
He claimed he had he arrived around noon. But in actual fact his arrival was documented by PBS news, and he didn't arrive until much later in the afternoon. He had been requested to go to the Pentagon by Walker Evey, the Pentagon renovation project manager. However, Evey himself didn't hear about the crash until shortly before noon. After that, Kilsheimer had to drive as close as he could to the Pentagon, then make a two hour walk to get to the crash site.

There are other anomolies in his statements, but I think I've discredited him enough for one post.

You'll notice I'm still not claiming that it wasn't a 757, but I'm astonished at how many "experts" are wheeled out to contradict these theories, yet they are so easily caught out in their lies and half-truths.

[lynx]

... not one has any acknowledged experience of high speed impacts. .

Unloke you, of course, who no doubt studied this at uni?

This conspiracy nonsense is a joke, a 757 flew into the Pentagon -- full stop. People saw it, they found the plane, and the black box, and the passengers and crew.

This is schoolboy stuff.Evading the point again, I see.

I'm not the one making claims about what happened there.
They are the ones apparently making the claims, but they have no expertise in the field.

But it turns out they didn't actually need any expertise, since the study they were carrying out was not intended to show directly what happened in the crash. What they were trying to do was show that it was possible to produce an animated simulation of what they believed happened. To this end they even got an animated model of a 757 from a games company, FFS.

I'm pretty sure your "abovetopsecret" site didn't bother to check what they were referring to, and neither did you. Next time, when you've googled something to "prove" your case, I suggest you find out what your source is actually talking about.

[Helghast004]

Sorry guys missunderstood the quote that was suppose to be here... :lookaroun

[whypikonme]

I'm pretty sure your "abovetopsecret" site didn't bother to check what they were referring to, and neither did you. Next time, when you've googled something to "prove" your case, I suggest you find out what your source is actually talking about.

Misrepresenting people again l see. You seem to make quite a habit of it ... l posted that site for the photos of bits of the plane, not the opinions of the site, even if they do make a lot more sense than you do.

[GepperRankins]

this is gonna sound wacky, but is it not possible that the heavy bits within the pentagon were already there, and the shreds of sheet steel outside could be planted or even projected from within the building?


straight away many people say they saw a small aircraft, cruise missile or unmanned drone. only later after the official story was released did the eye-witnesses say it was a 747.

i remember seeing something on tv about an experiment at loch ness. a tour guide was at lochside giving a talk about the loch ness monster. then a guy hidden in a bush pulled on a rope that lifted a plane old piece of 2 by 4 out of the water for a few seconds then dropped it back in. the witnesses were then asked to draw what they saw. all of them drew nessies head, some in detail, some just a blob(small head) on a stick(neck), none looked like a piece of 2 by 4.

[whypikonme]

straight away many people say they saw a small aircraft, cruise missile or unmanned drone. only later after the official story was released did the eye-witnesses say it was a 747.


So where are these people? And where is the 757? While you're at it, where are all the people who supposedly died inside the Pentagon, were they all made up too?

[GepperRankins]

i'm sorry i can't remember anyone disputing that anyone died. luckily the part that was hit was almost empty though. for all we know the plane could be back up in the air, along with the hijackers. i don't know where the people are, it was just the people the media reached first.


so far everose is the only person who's managed to make me cast doubt on the conspiracy theories :unsure:

[whypikonme]

. for all we know the plane could be back up in the air,

It'd be running short on fuel about now, don't you think?

[lynx]

I'm pretty sure your "abovetopsecret" site didn't bother to check what they were referring to, and neither did you. Next time, when you've googled something to "prove" your case, I suggest you find out what your source is actually talking about.

Misrepresenting people again l see. You seem to make quite a habit of it ... l posted that site for the photos of bits of the plane, not the opinions of the site, even if they do make a lot more sense than you do.
Ah, I see. You just wanted to use the blurred photo's, the majority of which aren't actually clear enough to show anything useful.

How stupid of me, I should have realised you were disassociating yourself from any written content on the site you linked to. Would I be right in assuming that you think their comments about the photographs are suspect?

Let's just examine the photographic "evidence".

Two small pieces, a smashed wheel and a nose strut are probably just what they say they are. Except that there's no reference in the shot to show where these photos were taken. Note the comment about "note how charred the area around it is", they are trying to convince us it was taken at the Pentagon. I would have taken it on face value without that comment.

The next photo claims another rim and a piece of aircraft bulkhead. In fact all that can truthfully be said is that there's something round and what could just as easily be part of an office ceiling or partition. But they placed the idea that a wheel rim was found and this one looks vaguely similar so why not include it. No need for objectivity.

Next there are the pieces with "Boeing green primer". So it's a good job we've established that nothing else in the world can be painted green. Hang on though, what happened to the soot and charring all round the impact hole? Ah well, there's a bit at the top of the picture, I suppose they think that will do.

Now there's a very clear shot of an amorphous mass. Oops, sorry, that should properly be described as "a tire with the same pattern as ones used on a 757".

Now the picture of the engine part. Ok, so maybe it's not part of a AE 3007H. There are plenty of others. They suggest it is a Honeywell APU. So why link to a picture that they've already said it can't be. Why not link to a picture of a Honeywell APU? And it is interesting that after almost 4 years that piece of debris has still not been officially identified. If it was so obviously part of a Honeywell APU that should be easy enough.

More engine parts, with a reference shot of an RB211 engine. Quite frankly the debris is so badly mangled and the photos so poor that I doubt whether an expert on Rolls Royce engines could identify that. Its just a shame they didn't have one to prove me wrong. Oh, wait, they did. And he didn't.

Next: "Evidence of the right engine impact on the side of the building is evident on the large pillar being sprayed with fire retardant." I think what they mean is that something damaged the wall, it is impossible to say what caused it.

Now comes evidence that some collateral damage was done. Well whoop-di-doo. Did anyone suggest that if it was something else than there would be no collateral damage?

The debris field. A couple of pictures of pieces so small they could have come from anything.

Now six photos of just about the only part which might be identifiable as part of an aircraft skin. Six photos. Presumably just in case we missed five of them. They really were getting desperate.

A photo of damage "obviously" made by the right engine. Obviously.

Then damage to a generator also made by that engine. Mind you, that engine certainly gets about a bit. If you look at the path supposedly taken by the generator that engine must have taken a quick trip out to the wingtip in order for it to have made the initial impact. It then dragged the generator back with it as it resumed it's normal position (and all this in about a microsecond) before finally knocking it out of the way.

Finally, the gate camera. Which curiously doen't have a picture of an aircraft. Hey, don't worry, those nice people from abovetopsecret can get a completely different shot, then paint one in for you so that it fits perfectly. One small problem though. Look where the tail fin is on the painted image. Then look at the actual shot. The whole of the area at that height is clear - there is no tail fin.

Now let's review their "review the facts"
# Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
The initial hole was about 75 feet.
# Rims found in building match those of a 757
They match any commercial airplane wheel
# Small turbine engine outside is an APU
That has never been established
# Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
There are dozens of other engines that have not been ruled out
# Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Blue upholstery laying on ground in photos
# Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
SAME part of some fuselage logo in more than 1 photo
# Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
That was not established by Rolls-Royce's own expert
# Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
Green and yellow paint found
# Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel generator was not in the flight path
# Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
Large deisel generator was not in the flight path
# Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane
# Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane hit the Pentagon
# 60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage
This is the best of the lot. The fire burned for about 60 hours. For the first 3 and a half hours it was so intense that fire crews could not get close enough to get water on it. Yet they expect us to believe that they found and identified over 60 bodies. But at the same time other sites tell us that the reason so little of the plane was found is because it burnt up in the intense heat. We should be grateful that the human body is so much more resiliant than an airframe.

[whypikonme]

:smartass:

You make me laugh, where are you .. Yorkshire or somewhere? Did you go to the Pentagon immediately after the crash? Of course not, you just have some magical fountain of indisputable knowledge, the problem is, you fail to point to it, as usual. Talk about flimsy. It seems you hold yourself up as an expert on everything, even aeroplanes crashing into buildings, maybe your statistical knowledge points to it?

This conspiracy theory is crap, so where do you get your info from? Instead of rubbishing everyone else, come up with your evidence, show us your sources, seeing as you have no first hand knowledge of what happened.

[lynx]

:smartass:

You make me laugh, where are you .. Yorkshire or somewhere? Did you go to the Pentagon immediately after the crash? Of course not, you just have some magical fountain of indisputable knowledge, the problem is, you fail to point to it, as usual. Talk about flimsy. It seems you hold yourself up as an expert on everything, even aeroplanes crashing into buildings, maybe your statistical knowledge points to it?

This conspiracy theory is crap, so where do you get your info from? Instead of rubbishing everyone else, come up with your evidence, show us your sources, seeing as you have no first hand knowledge of what happened.Are you some sort of dickhead? Don't you ever read anything before you post?

I've consistently said I'm making no claims. I think most of the conspiracy theories are bunk. You wrote earlier about misrepresentation, yet that's all you and the links you make ever do. You never produce any hard incontrovertible evidence.

Your problem is you respond to the theories with links to sites which contain an equal amount of crap. These sites put themselves forwards as fountains of truth, and you latch on to them as if they contained messages from your god. Are you suggesting we should just meekly accept your "truth".

You clearly haven't checked out your sources, it is only right that someone should. And when I tear your flimsy evidence to shreds you have the cheek to say I'm the one who needs to produce evidence. Evidence of what? I'm making no claims, merely showing that your's aren't valid.

[whypikonme]

Evidence of what? I'm making no claims, merely showing that your's aren't valid.

Showing my what aren't valid? A plane crashed into the Pentagon, that isn't MY claim, it's the claim of everyone who KNOWS anything about it, and you haven't shown that all the evidence isn't valid at all. You just come up with a pile of half-arsed theories about the damage done by planes crashing into buildings. A 757 was hijacked, people phoned from the plane, it was seen crashing into the Pentagon by several people, bits were found, the black box was found, bodies were found, if you don't accept that, then you should have reasons you don't believe it, instead, you rubbish people. Where is the plane and all the passengers if it didn't hit the Pentagon? If it was a set-up, what about the ones that crashed into the WTC? Or is that just a coincidence?

This is your 'evidence' ..


The guy who wrote that report (Mete Sozen) assumed that metal will bend, just as it does in an automobile accident. But at the speeds involved there's one slight problem with that assumption. The metal simply does not have time to bend. But that's what you get when you ask an expert on static structures to explain the effect of a high speed impact. Unless of course you want the wrong conclusion to be drawn.

At best the wing will shear off. And if it shears off then there is nothing to draw it into the hole made by the fuselage, instead it will keep going in a straight line and therefore must either make its own hole or be left outside. There is no evidence it did either, so the correct assumption is that either it wasn't a 757, or that part or all of the wing was absent at the time of impact.

So you're an expert on high speed impacts are you? Another string to your astonishing bow.

Let's not forget this little gem as well,


"If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen." Well, he actually got that bit right, it didn't happen

[Cheese]

Welcome to this week's edition of "When People Don't Read Posts Properly".:rolleyes:

[lynx]

Showing my what aren't valid? A plane crashed into the Pentagon, that isn't MY claim, it's the claim of everyone who KNOWS anything about it, and you haven't shown that all the evidence isn't valid at all. You just come up with a pile of half-arsed theories about the damage done by planes crashing into buildings. A 757 was hijacked, people phoned from the plane, it was seen crashing into the Pentagon by several people, bits were found, the black box was found, bodies were found, if you don't accept that, then you should have reasons you don't believe it, instead, you rubbish people. Where is the plane and all the passengers if it didn't hit the Pentagon? If it was a set-up, what about the ones that crashed into the WTC? Or is that just a coincidence?

This is your 'evidence' ..


The guy who wrote that report (Mete Sozen) assumed that metal will bend, just as it does in an automobile accident. But at the speeds involved there's one slight problem with that assumption. The metal simply does not have time to bend. But that's what you get when you ask an expert on static structures to explain the effect of a high speed impact. Unless of course you want the wrong conclusion to be drawn.

At best the wing will shear off. And if it shears off then there is nothing to draw it into the hole made by the fuselage, instead it will keep going in a straight line and therefore must either make its own hole or be left outside. There is no evidence it did either, so the correct assumption is that either it wasn't a 757, or that part or all of the wing was absent at the time of impact.

So you're an expert on high speed impacts are you? Another string to your astonishing bow.

Let's not forget this little gem as well,


"If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen." Well, he actually got that bit right, it didn't happen
You really have lost the plot haven't you. And once again you haven't read what I said.

You stated the conspiracy theories were crap. Do you want to dispute that as being different from a claim? Anyway, maybe they are crap. You won't find anywhere that I've said anything to the contrary. The problem comes with the way you try to back up your statements. I am simply pointing out that the evidence you presented is as crap as the theories they purport to disprove.

Blurred images, pictures whose location at the crash site is extremely dubious, pictures which they admit have been doctored, presentation of theory as "obvious fact" and "impacts" which simply could not have happened. If you can do better than that, why didn't you? You presented that site as some sort of proof, are you now claiming it is unimpeachable?

Are you disputing that the fire burnt for 60 hours?
Are you claiming that only Boeing use green and yellow paint?
Are you saying that abovetopsecret's Rolls-Royce expert identified an RB211 engine?

I haven't said that the conspiracy theories were true, despite your attempts to infer the opposite. What I've done is to thoroughly discredit your evidence. There may well be evidence out there which will comprehensively back up your statement that the conspiracy theories are nonsense. If you want to produce evidence like that I will be happy to accept it. I'm just saying that the evidence you've "produced" so far doesn't do it.

[neon]

http://immortal-technique.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4020
9/11 Movies, truth and opinions.
any opinions? check it. ^^^^^ ?

[lynx]

And on the WTC7 building.........I decided against the conspiracy theories when I realized this Larry Silverstein has never owned this building. A 99 year lease from the New York Port Authority by Silverstein Properties, Inc. doesn't constitute ownership to me. And that being the case......what right would he have to even think of demolishing? I have to agree I can't think of a single legal reason.

However, he was paying out $3.2 billion over 99 years, but he expected insurance policies to cover him and his company for around $9.2 billion. That's 6 billion illegal reasons. Unfortunately for him he didn't get $3.5 billion of that money. My heart bleeds for him.

[Everose]

Yeah, I read about the insurance policies, too, Lynx. But would someone admit to demolishing a building in this way when it would negate his collecting insurance. Insurance claims adjusters on this big of a claim would be tough.

And as far as the structural engineer, I only read that he was the first structural engineer on the site.

I think a lot of confusion has been based on the surreal demand for literal interpretations of investigators, and others words..........some taken right after dealing with the aftermath of this horrendous disaster, some taken down the road a bit when just being asked about it brings back the horror of the situation.

I have seen a lot of 'it could have been this, too,' but I haven't seen much proof to discount facts as they were best able to report them.

I can only imagine the horror of the moment and dealing with the after effects. I don't feel like this is taken into account when people.s statements are being literally taken apart and analyzed word by word. I am by no means perfect, but saying I held a wing in my own hands after dealing with this horror, is very possible. I don't know if my mind could be very good at thinking I needed to get the exact proper adjective in my statement. I would hope people would understand human nature and use their common sense to understand what I meant....I could in no way hold a whole 757's wing, tail section, or whatever.

I may be wrong here, but after reading what I have read.......here and elsewhere.........about the bodies found afterwards at the pentagon. With such an impact, I doubt all body parts remained in the immediate area of the fire. It seems feasible that parts were flung about, and it also seems feasible to me that a large part of them would be flung about. I have even gone so far to think that even though bones burn....do teeth? Comparing passenger lists against remains would be a tedious task. But I also imagine those sixty passengers had loved ones that wanted proof, and I haven't seen one single family member dispute the proof given them.

What I have seen is a tremendous amount of credence and space given to websites, mostly based in other countries, disputing this. After reviewing them last evening, I can only ask what is up with that?

[Santa]

To demolish a building in the center of manhattan in the middle of a national crisis = Power (aka - networking - do you have this power?)
According to close architect buddies of mine - the world trade centers could easily collapse after their necks where removed and the top collapsed after a sidewards impulse wack from a plane

I am pro "Less Architecture"

unless lives are taken

[lynx]

@Everose, I totally agree with your sentiments, though I am perhaps a little more cynical about the motives of the men in positions of influence/power. I haven't actually seen what Larry Silverstein is supposed to have said, and even if I had I'm pretty sure it would have been out of context. I was merely countering your position that he had no legal right/reason for demolishing World Trade Building 7 with the suggestion that he had a lot of illegal reasons.

I also completely agree that some of the statements by Kilsheimer were obviously taken out of context, but I was simply quoting those statements. I wasn't the one who removed the context element, that was done by those who were trying to misuse them to prove an alternative viewpoint. And that's largely been my whole point throughout, that just as much effort has been put in to misrepresenting evidence to counter conspiracy theories as has been used to promote them.

Does fire destroy teeth? I'm no expert but as far as I'm aware teeth are simply modified bone material so they should be affected by heat in much the same way. Are teeth regularly found in the ashes produced from a cremation? I've only seen the results twice and I can't say I studied them too closely so I don't atually know, but that process certainly doesn't produce temperatures anything like those reported at the Pentagon.

As you say, the loved ones of the passengers may have wanted some sort of proof. But what sort of proof could they have been given? Even if they were really shown teeth and bones there is no way that they could have independently matched these to their own family members. Only a DNA analysis would be of use, and if there was a cover-up I feel pretty certain there would be plans in place to meet that possibility.

One other small point that has occured to me. It doesn't prove anything about conspiracies, it simply questions some of the unofficial "evidence". I'm referring to the theory of the "liquidized" aeroplane. It is compared to what happens in an avalanche where solids behave as liquids.

The thing about avalanches is that the solid material is composed of relatively small pieces which roll over one another. For the same thing to happen to these aircraft they would have to have shattered into small fragments. I can't think of any reason why that should have happened, It has never been suggested to have happened in any other air crahs, and I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that it did in this instance either.

But let's assume that there was some condition in the impacts on the towers which did cause the aircraft to shatter. The crash at the Pentagon did not nearly match the conditions in the tower impacts, so why would we get the same effect?

Another piece of dodgy "evidence" disposed of, I think.

[GepperRankins]

here's something to think about. howcome the rubble outside the footprint fell the same speed as the tower. surely even if the steel could collapse under the weight they held for over 20 years the steel and concrete being crushed would fall slower than that, that only fights air

[whypikonme]

What I've done is to thoroughly discredit your evidence

:lol: :lol: Really? You call this discrediting? Where's your evidence for all the red bits?


Now let's review their "review the facts"
# Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
The initial hole was about 75 feet.
# Rims found in building match those of a 757
They match any commercial airplane wheel
# Small turbine engine outside is an APU
That has never been established
# Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
There are dozens of other engines that have not been ruled out
# Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Blue upholstery laying on ground in photos
# Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
SAME part of some fuselage logo in more than 1 photo
# Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
That was not established by Rolls-Royce's own expert
# Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
Green and yellow paint found
# Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel generator was not in the flight path
# Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
Large deisel generator was not in the flight path
# Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane
# Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane hit the Pentagon
# 60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage
This is the best of the lot. The fire burned for about 60 hours. For the first 3 and a half hours it was so intense that fire crews could not get close enough to get water on it. Yet they expect us to believe that they found and identified over 60 bodies. But at the same time other sites tell us that the reason so little of the plane was found is because it burnt up in the intense heat. We should be grateful that the human body is so much more resiliant than an airframe.

Evidence, according to you, is your word, Mr. Knowitall, if Lynx says it, then it must be true.

You're just a joke, you must be wishing you'd never posted here, because you're taking on a cause you can't win. Four planes went missing, one was found in a field, two were filmed crashing into the WTC, what happened to the other one? According to you there is no proof it crashed into the Pentagon.

Well, http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/5177/doh3la.gif (http://imageshack.us)

[Everose]

No, Lynx, I don't think you are really more cynical than I am about men, or for that matter women, too, with political power and the abuse of that power. You may be a tad bit more vocal about it than I am, though. :D And in my opinion, that is not a bad thing.

Nah, you really haven't disposed of any evidence for me. But thanks for trying. It has been a long process.....more than a few years of reading everything I could find on this.

One thing....'conspiracy' does kind of 'throw blame.' And in my experience, oftimes history shows that such blame is often misplaced, and even intentionally misdirected. imo 'alternative' theory is a better term and a lot less offsetting to those who have lived with this tragedy.

As for me, I am off to google 'color of black boxes'. :lol:

My husband has a documented genuis level IQ in mechanical problem solving. He also has a license in air frame and power plant mechanics and is a pilot. He has worked on airplanes from one end to the other. Amazing man. (don't tell him I said that or I will deny it. It is my lifes work to keep this man humble) I know I have discussed this some with him along the way, but basically, he encourages me to read and find my own way, and he would be the first to admit he wouldn't have a clue nor does he know anyone that has a clue what exactly happens when a plane hits a building, other than death. He would probably first tell me a lot would depend on the building's structure and how many of the load bearing walls were compromised by the hit. But then again he just might tell me that we had threats, we had gloating and dancing in the streets and responsiblity not only taken but thrown back repeatedly in our faces. What more do I want. ;)

I guess my point is a lot of people in the past with less experience than he has with airplanes and buildings have built alternative theories without having a leg to stand on. And maybe that has fogged things up a bit.

I do want to say that after once again googling all those sites last night, I came away with wondering how can these 'alternative theorists', mostly from other countries, not having been there and dealt with it, determine (from reading the reports from the American experts) that the American experts were so mistaken in their calculations.

Well, my husband did ask me if I knew what color black boxes were,. I am thinking he is suggesting I am out of my element. :lol:

[lynx]

:lol: :lol: Really? You call this discrediting? Where's your evidence for all the red bits?


Now let's review their "review the facts"
# Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
The initial hole was about 75 feet.
# Rims found in building match those of a 757
They match any commercial airplane wheel
# Small turbine engine outside is an APU
That has never been established
# Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
There are dozens of other engines that have not been ruled out
# Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Blue upholstery laying on ground in photos
# Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
SAME part of some fuselage logo in more than 1 photo
# Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
That was not established by Rolls-Royce's own expert
# Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
Green and yellow paint found
# Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel generator was not in the flight path
# Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
Large deisel generator was not in the flight path
# Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane
# Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane hit the Pentagon
# 60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage
This is the best of the lot. The fire burned for about 60 hours. For the first 3 and a half hours it was so intense that fire crews could not get close enough to get water on it. Yet they expect us to believe that they found and identified over 60 bodies. But at the same time other sites tell us that the reason so little of the plane was found is because it burnt up in the intense heat. We should be grateful that the human body is so much more resiliant than an airframe.

Evidence, according to you, is your word, Mr. Knowitall, if Lynx says it, then it must be true.

You're just a joke, you must be wishing you'd never posted here, because you're taking on a cause you can't win. Four planes went missing, one was found in a field, two were filmed crashing into the WTC, what happened to the other one? According to you there is no proof it crashed into the Pentagon.

Well, http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/5177/doh3la.gif (http://imageshack.us)

Where possible I'll use sites backing your interpretation for this info:

# Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
The initial hole was about 75 feet.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=6&c=y

# Rims found in building match those of a 757
They match any commercial airplane wheelOk, you got me there, I should have said the rim matched any commercial airplane wheel, it is an NTSB requirement. It you doubt that remark, check your own link:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

# Small turbine engine outside is an APU
That has never been established
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/121003mysteryenginepart.html
“There’s no way that’s an APU wheel,” an expert at Honeywell told AFP.

# Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
There are dozens of other engines that have not been ruled out
Self evident.

# Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Blue upholstery laying on ground in photos
Most commercial aircraft seats are similar in design, but it would be virtually impossible to categorically state from the blurred photo that this upholstery even came from an aircraft. What's more, airlines have been severely criticised for the flamability of their seating. Strange that this one managed to survive the terrific temperatures unscathed.

# Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
SAME part of some fuselage logo in more than 1 photo
There is no way to determine from the photos that this piece of skin has an American Airlines logo on it.

# Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
That was not established by Rolls-Royce's own expert
Self evident, he didn't.

# Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
Green and yellow paint found
http://paint.aeroperform.com/catalog/prod_info.asp

# Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel generator was not in the flight path
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html
Their own picture shows that the generator would have to have moved about 30 feet to the south in order to be in line with the engine.

# Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
Large deisel generator was not in the flight path
See above

# Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane
Self evident

# Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane hit the Pentagon
Self evident

# 60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage
This is the best of the lot. The fire burned for about 60 hours. For the first 3 and a half hours it was so intense that fire crews could not get close enough to get water on it. Yet they expect us to believe that they found and identified over 60 bodies. But at the same time other sites tell us that the reason so little of the plane was found is because it burnt up in the intense heat. We should be grateful that the human body is so much more resiliant than an airframe.[/QUOTE]
http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
I can't find the site that quoted 60 hours, but that's hardly important. The fact is that the Fire Chief stated that most of the aircraft had burnt up.

You can make yourself look an even bigger idiot and question the bits which are self evident if you like.

But you can't back up your own statements: "According to you there is no proof it crashed into the Pentagon."
I think I've told you that's not my position four times now, I can't be bothered to go back and count. Perhaps you want to dispute that and tell me it is only 3 times.

Now you've got a slight problem.
I've shown that your own link gives you some of the evidence you wanted. Of course, you can claim that evidence is crap if you want, like I've been doing for the last 2 days. But that hardly does your position much good does it. :lol: :lol:

[whypikonme]

What have you answered? Have you provided any proof that there is no evidence a 757 crashed into the Pentagon? NO!

What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. This was from one of the sites you quote, contrary to your assumption.


Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane
Did they? Where are these accounts then?


There is no way to determine from the photos that this piece of skin has an American Airlines logo on it.
http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/462/letterpiececomp4gq.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


Large deisel generator was not in the flight path.

Their own picture shows that the generator would have to have moved about 30 feet to the south in order to be in line with the engine.

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/4479/00000000000000000tgfirespray3w.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Photo of a burning power generator (green arrow) in front of the Pentagon before the wall has collapsed.



:P

[lynx]

Have you provided any proof that there is no evidence a 757 crashed into the Pentagon? NO! And I wasn't trying to. That's the fifth time I've told you that. Hasn't that sunk in yet?


What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. This was from one of the sites you quote, contrary to your assumption.It was from one of the sites I disputed, but backs up your claim, as I clearly stated. But quite frankly look at it, it is a preposterous statement. A brand new matter state. Oh well, throw away all the science books. But let's assume for a second that it could have a grain of truth in it. We've all seen how liquids moving at speed gather themselves together to enter pipes and holes. Oh, wait, no they don't, they just keep going in a straight line.



Multiple eye witnesses say they saw a missile/small plane

Did they? Where are these accounts then?I know I said you could make yourself look even more of an idiot, I didn't really think you would take me up on it. I really am not going to bother with this nonsense. :lol: :lol:

Have you ever sat at the end of a runway watching planes land. Ever tried to work out what plane they are or who the carrier is in the few seconds between the plane passing over your head and it touching down? When I pick people up from the local airport there's a place i park where I can see just that much. It is damn difficult I can tell you, and that's when you are expecting planes to be coming.

Now imagine what it is like when you aren't expecting a plane, and it is travelling at well over twice normal landing speed. Still reckon everyone can say what sort of plane it is and who the carrier was. A few aviation experts may get it right, most wouldn't. The general public would certainly get it wrong in the majority of cases.

Nice picture of an aircraft. I'm tempted to concede the point about the logo. Looks like you've finally found a useful site. Care to let us in on what it is?

But the burning generator? There's nothing in that picture to suggest it has been hit or moved. And you imply that a large chunk of wall is about to collapse on it. Good job that won't do any damage then. Like putting a large depression in the top which will later be claimed as impact damage.

Keep it up, I'm enjoying your wriggling. :naughty:

[whypikonme]

Don't worry about the eyewitness accounts then, l wouldn't want to bother you. As for aircraft identification, l did that in the Air Cadets, so maybe l'm just good at it, living three miles from the runway at Heathrow may have helped too. l can certainly tell a 757 from a Cruise Missile.


Nice picture of an aircraft. I'm tempted to concede the point about the logo. Looks like you've finally found a useful site. Care to let us in on what it is?
Only if you promise not to critique the whole site.
Mark Faram (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/wr-redl.html)


But the burning generator? There's nothing in that picture to suggest it has been hit or moved. And you imply that a large chunk of wall is about to collapse on it. Good job that won't do any damage then. Like putting a large depression in the top which will later be claimed as impact damage.
Misrepresenting again? :lol: The CAPTION under the pic says, "Photo of a burning power generator (green arrow) in front of the Pentagon before the wall has collapsed." Who said it was next to the building, and close enough to be collapsed on?
http://img360.imageshack.us/img360/3317/0000gen3gk.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Flight 77 Generator (http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/generator.html)
Pentagon Building Performance Report. (http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf)


Keep it up, I'm enjoying your wriggling.
:lol: You wish! :lol:

[GepperRankins]

I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. ... The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States.

[Barbarossa]

I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. ... The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States.

How about a real source rather than a fake quote?

[GepperRankins]

http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html

apparently it was on the BBC site, but i can't find it.


he's right though :naughty:

[whypikonme]

I don't believe or disbelieve that bin Laden had anything to do with 9\11, I certainly would never take the word of Bush as being true. There has been no proof that he was involved, he certainly claimed at first that he had nothing to do with it, why would he lie? He later claimed, so they say, that he was involved, and why wouldn't he, there was a bounty on his head and he was wanted dead or alive. There is no doubt that al Qaeda benefited from the US vitriol, they made the 'organisation' famous, and brought many Muslims to it's cause. Now, of course, the words al Qaeda have become a rallying call for every disaffected Muslim the world over.

[Everose]

I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. ... The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States.


I must have missed something. Who really gives a flying leap about what this religious extremist says?

[whypikonme]

I must have missed something. Who really gives a flying leap about what this religious extremist says?

Plenty of people. :cool:

[GepperRankins]

I must have missed something. Who really gives a flying leap about what this religious extremist says?
considering the official story is that this guy is apparently responsible for september 11th, and due to that day being linked to him there's been two wars in the east and tens of thousands of people have died. back over here our rights are being stripped daily and our taxes pay for these wars. i think what he says is pretty important

[GepperRankins]

I don't believe or disbelieve that bin Laden had anything to do with 9\11, I certainly would never take the word of Bush as being true. There has been no proof that he was involved, he certainly claimed at first that he had nothing to do with it, why would he lie? He later claimed, so they say, that he was involved, and why wouldn't he, there was a bounty on his head and he was wanted dead or alive. There is no doubt that al Qaeda benefited from the US vitriol, they made the 'organisation' famous, and brought many Muslims to it's cause. Now, of course, the words al Qaeda have become a rallying call for every disaffected Muslim the world over.
he didn't claim responsibility.



osama bin laden
http://911research.com/disinfo/deceptions/docs/osama.jpg

the guy who confessed
http://911research.com/disinfo/deceptions/docs/osamafake.jpg

you've had some convincing arguements so far. about the pentagon. it probably was a plane, if they hijack and kill 3 planes worth why not get 4?

i believe the towers were destroyed by explosives though and it wasn't muslims behind it at all.


i'd like to see someone dispute this though :rolleyes:

[neon]

follows - this was ONLY possible if 9/11 happened it gives Very good reason to be an "inside" job:


This isn’t just a war against Iraqis or Afghanis or even Arabs or Muslims. It is ultimately a war on us all. That’s because the billions and billions of dollars that are being spent on this war—the cost of tanks, rocketry, bullets, and yes, even salaries for the 125,000-plus troops—is money that will never be spent on education, on health care, on the reconstruction of crumbling public housing, or to train and place the millions of workers who have lost manufacturing jobs in the past three years alone.



The war in Iraq is, in reality, a war against the nation’s workers and the poor who are getting less and less while the big defense industries are making a

killing—literally. What’s next? Iran? Syria? North Korea? Venezuela? We’ve already seen the corporate media play megaphone to the White House to build and promote a war based on lies.



It’s been a long time ago, but that great Russian revolutionary, Leon Trotsky, said, “War is utilized by the imperialists, first and foremost, to crush internal enemies.” We’re seeing the truth of his insight when we see the sad state of American education, the rush of seniors to buy affordable medication from the Canadians because American drugs are just too expensive, the threatened privatization of Social Security, and the wave of repression that comes with an increasingly militarized police. Does the Homeland Security Department make you feel any safer?



In Black America things get grimmer every day as resources that are already scarce begin to shrink even further. Young people feel that prisons are

rite-of-passage, an inevitable place to visit. And a decent job seems like a distant dream.



This is a war on all of us, and the struggle against war is really a struggle for a better life for the millions of folks who are in need here in this country. The fight against the war is really to fight for your own interests, not the false interests of the defense industries, or the corporate media, or the White House.


Bush’s “grim vision” always recognized that the “war on terror” abroad would require restricted freedoms at home – as well as expanded powers for the police and military. So, just as in 2002, when the “Bush Doctrine” on preemptive wars laid the intellectual groundwork for invading Iraq, new doctrines are now being promulgated to justify the creation of a full-scale “security state” inside the United States.
One Defense Department document, called the “Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support,” sets out a military strategy against terrorism that envisions an “active, layered defense” both inside and outside U.S. territory.

As a kind of domestic corollary to the Bush Doctrine, the Pentagon strategy paper also has a preemptive element, calling for increased military reconnaissance and surveillance to “defeat potential challengers before they threaten the United States.” The plan “maximizes threat awareness and seizes the initiative from those who would harm us.”

Global War

Besides lifting the traditional limits on military operations on U.S. soil, the document makes clear that global warfare will be the reality for at least the next decade.


Also:

In effect, the Bush administration is prescribing a large dose of military action and political repression as the cure for Islamic terrorism.
Everyone delusional enough to think this will "cure" the "problem," raise your hand. (We want to know who to blame, when this starts WWIII, as it well might.)

Besides the question of civil liberties, the strategy represents a rejection of advice from counterinsurgency experts who warn that an over-reliance on warfare and inadequate attention to the root causes of Middle East anger could perpetuate terrorism indefinitely, rather than reduce it to a manageable problem that can be handled by law enforcement.

[whypikonme]

i believe the towers were destroyed by explosives though and it wasn't muslims behind it at all.
l don't believe the towers were destroyed by explosions, and l haven't seen any proof that they were. There may be an explanation for what appeared to some people to be explosions though. When l left school l worked in a concrete testing laboratory for a company called Concrete Limited. Our job was to test concrete beams and columns to destruction. At the point of destruction they would literally explode, loudly and violently. As the towers started to collapse, extra weight would have been exerted downwards, which could have caused certain parts of the building to appear to explode.

[Rat Faced]

i believe the towers were destroyed by explosives though and it wasn't muslims behind it at all.
l don't believe the towers were destroyed by explosions, and l haven't seen any proof that they were. There may be an explanation for what appeared to some people to be explosions though. When l left school l worked in a concrete testing laboratory for a company called Concrete Limited. Our job was to test concrete beams and columns to destruction. At the point of destruction they would literally explode, loudly and violently. As the towers started to collapse, extra weight would have been exerted downwards, which could have caused certain parts of the building to appear to explode.

Correct.. except that the act of compression also slows the fall down.

The rubble outside fell at the same speed as the building.. this, for me is evidence of a controlled demolition.

[Everose]

I must have missed something. Who really gives a flying leap about what this religious extremist says?
considering the official story is that this guy is apparently responsible for september 11th, and due to that day being linked to him there's been two wars in the east and tens of thousands of people have died. back over here our rights are being stripped daily and our taxes pay for these wars. i think what he says is pretty important


So if you believe the 'official story' he is important. If you don't believe the official story you still feel what he says is pretty important.

I believe planes were hijacked and flown into buildings. I blame the hijackers for this.

I don't believe I will give credence to this religious extremist. Regardless.

[JPaul]

Only if you promise not to critique the whole site.
Mark Faram (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/wr-redl.html)

Why, because the author is a Baha'i, that's a bit harsh.

They're decent spuds.

[maebach]

How much more of this? My dad was telling me that Bush Sr. said that if he didn't pull troops out of middle east when he did, they would've been stuck for 10 years. Then Bush Jr. does the samething his father said shouldn't be done. I'll try to find the book.

[Rat Faced]

Only if you promise not to critique the whole site.
Mark Faram (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/wr-redl.html)

Why, because the author is a Baha'i, that's a bit harsh.

They're decent spuds.

Wonder how much he made selling those pics to the media?

[JPaul]

Why, because the author is a Baha'i, that's a bit harsh.

They're decent spuds.

Wonder how much he made selling those pics to the media?

Here's his conclusion page

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/cen-conclu.html

Here's a link from his site, might appeal to you and The, RF.

http://www.oilempire.us/

[Rat Faced]

How much more of this? My dad was telling me that Bush Sr. said that if he didn't pull troops out of middle east when he did, they would've been stuck for 10 years. Then Bush Jr. does the samething his father said shouldn't be done. I'll try to find the book.



Trying to eliminate Saddam [in 1991], extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guidelines about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in 'mission creep', and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs... Would have have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, there was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see, violating another of our principles... Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different - and perhaps barren - outcome.". (quoted in Losing America, pg 154)

..."A World Transformed" George Bush

A more likely reason is that the Arab countries (and a good few others in the coalition) were really pissed off about Iraqi troops being buried alive by Americans in one action, and also about the "Highway of Death"...

The UN resolution also only gave authority to go to the Iraqi borders, it was quite specific about that.

To have attempted to invade would have done more than broke up the coalition, it would have left around 500,000 troops surrounded by enemies on all sides, with no practical way to re-supply them.

[whypikonme]

Correct.. except that the act of compression also slows the fall down.

The rubble outside fell at the same speed as the building.. this, for me is evidence of a controlled demolition.

The initial act of collapse would have created a huge weight gain, a sudden push downwards, like hitting the floors below with a sledgehammer.

l cannot see any rhyme or reason in demolishing the buildings, it would mean planting explosives in the building first, and coordinating that with the highjackers, why would they have commited suicide if it were an American plot?

[GepperRankins]

Correct.. except that the act of compression also slows the fall down.

The rubble outside fell at the same speed as the building.. this, for me is evidence of a controlled demolition.

The initial act of collapse would have created a huge weight gain, a sudden push downwards, like hitting the floors below with a sledgehammer.

l cannot see any rhyme or reason in demolishing the buildings, it would mean planting explosives in the building first, and coordinating that with the highjackers, why would they have commited suicide if it were an American plot?
considering a building like this has never collapsed from fire, they needed to make sure they went down.

whether or not it could have crushed itself, there would have been some resistance, the towers fell almost at terminal velocity onto themselves.


the suicide front was to make it look like muslims did it

[whypikonme]

.. the suicide front was to make it look like muslims did it

So who flew the planes?

[GepperRankins]

remote control? :ermm:

[whypikonme]

remote control? :ermm:

What about the passengers, wouldn't they have noticed the man outside the window with the remote?

[GepperRankins]

i'm guessing they'd have used something with a longer range than a tv remote.


remember most of the hijackers are still alive and thinking wtf

[Rat Faced]

I dont know.

I dont say they were american pilots either.

I do know that i dont believe the official version of events. This is supported by physical evidence and that there are an extremly suspicious set of co-incidents.


Does this mean that Bush, or anyone else in the administration/security services were involved? Not necessarily, although it does raise the odds from "Impossible" to say "unlikely". They certainly took advantage of the situation though.

The most damning thing for me is the fact that they are encouraging the most unlikely sets of conspiracy theories delibratly.. that lumps all theories in the same boat. People are misdirected to the wildly improbable, such as "It wasnt a 757 that hit the Pentagon". They then dont look too closely at the ones that cant/wont be answered; such as:

Why say the Black Boxes of the ones at WTC werent found, when the people on the ground say they loaded them into an FBI vehicle?

Why refuse to release the video footage that was taken from business' all around the Pentagon?

Why put a gag order on the Firemen?

Why play delaying tactics in the courts with the suit against GW for Treason, and not even allow the media to report there is one? Why not just go to court and get it over with?

Same for the suit under the RICO(?) laws..

Why refuse to answer questions under Oath?

Why were some of the answers given by Rice under oath, different to those she told the world in the Media?

The list goes on and on...

Some, such as the Rice thing, i can understand.... She could have been playing the propaganda card in the media, and couldnt under oath for example.

Others, there is no reason... except they would reveal a trail of lies that politics in general in the USA would never recover from. NOTE: I didnt say "Republicans" i said politics.

If you follow the money; Oil is selling at over $64 a barrel at the moment.. who, in the current administration, gains from selling Oil at high prices?

Weapons and Ordinance were and still are, being bought at hugely increased rates. Who in the administration gains by an upsurge in the weapons trade?


Just about every week, something is uncovered that shows that we were lied to re: Iraq.

Afganistan is now ran by the Warlords that grow the white poppies again..result, a certain pipeline is now being built through Afganistan and Heroin prices are at an altime low on the streets. What happened to "This time we will not forget them"?

Iraq is a quagmire that is, lets face it, a Civil war in the making.

The Kurds are now bombing Turkey, as they were before they were the "allies" in the invasion... when do they get classed as terrorists supporting Al Queda again?



The whole situation from 911 onwards stinks... hell forget 911, from the election in 2000.

Something very suspicious is happening in US Government the last few years.. and it didnt start with Bush Jnr. He's just the daft sod that's been the most blatent :(

[lynx]

@whypikonleo

Thanks for the links, in particular the Pentagon Building Performance Report (http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf). It wasn't exactly the sort of title I would have searched for. Very interesting though, it gives some very useful information regarding the position of the generator.

I refer you to figure 3.2 on page 15 of the report (page 12 of the pdf file). This shows the aircraft line of flight to be such that, assuming the generator to be where indicated, the right engine of a 757 would be in line with the generator.

I now refer you to page 36 of that report (page 23 of the pdf file). Look at the supposed path of the plane through the building - straight at the hole in the inner wall of ring c. Yet if you look at the line of damage inside the building it does not proceed in the same direction, and the hole in the wall of ring c is at the very edge of the main damage area.

There is the aircraft wheel just outside the hold in ring c. If that is what has been claimed, it can not be the nose wheel since the nose wheel is different (http://www.jetphotos.net/images/h/HB_IEE_nose_wheel_detail.jpg.97320.jpg). Ie, it is a main landing gear wheel. This also implies that the nose did not end up in this area.

Unless I'm very much mistaken, it is logical to assume that the main line of damage inside the building would follow the original line of flight. Ok, that's probably only a few degrees. But the diagram in figure 3.2 shows the pre-impact aircraft following the same line which ends up at the hole in ring c.

If you adjust the line of flight in this diagram to match the line of damage, then the right engine would completely miss the generator in it's supposed position.

This neither confirms nor denies whether it was a 757 which hit the Pentagon, but it removes yet another piece of "evidence".

Actually, I'm also a little puzzled by an omission from the report. Reports such as these usually try to give as much information as possible, and to that end they include before and after photographs for comparison. Yet there is not one single photograph of how things were before the crash. Was there a shortage? That hardly seems likely, a major reconstruction was about to be completed, it is inconceivable that hundreds of pictures weren't taken.

I notice that Mete Sozen was also one of the authors of the report. There are no references to his liquidized aeroplane theory. Was it perhaps just a little too bizarre for an official document, I wonder.

[whypikonme]

The actual, exact, path of the plane cannot possibly be known except to a tolerence of maybe +\- a metre or two. The video animation l saw months ago, from some university, (Purdoe? (sp.)), suggested also that the plane, because the left wing ploughed into the ground, may have entered the building with a slight speed bias towards the right (?). l guess the makeup of the building's structure would also hamper any attempt to determine the exact path. They also said that it took the plane only one tenth of a second to travel through the building, and, presumably, come to a complete stop from (x)00kms per hour. When you look at some of the pics in that report they really had a mess to sort out, and not a lot of prior experience of planes crashing into buildings to call on.

[lynx]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but if one side digs in, doesn't that side slow down and therefore cause a turn in that direction? I suppose it could simply cause a rotation of the aircraft to the left, but there's no way it could alter the flight path to the right.

A snippet from the co-producers of the video.
Source (http://www.innovations-report.de/html/berichte/interdisziplinaere_forschung/bericht-12739.html)

A major challenge has been learning how to combine commercially available software with the special models needed to simulate an airliner hitting a building, Kilic said.

The Purdue team used commercial software that is normally used by auto manufacturers to simulate car crashes. But adapting the software to simulate the plane crash and then combining the realistic-looking graphics with scientific simulation has been especially difficult, Kilic said.

"Integrating these two animations is uncommon," he said. "We are discovering a new territory. We had some interaction with aeronautical engineers, and they had never heard of this kind of a simulation, with an aircraft hitting a building.I think that interprets as:
Perdue: look what we done
aeronautical engineers: wtf? :blink:

:lol:

[whypikonme]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but if one side digs in, doesn't that side slow down and therefore cause a turn in that direction? I suppose it could simply cause a rotation of the aircraft to the left, but there's no way it could alter the flight path to the right.

That's what l meant, the right side was going faster, it's this grass, l haven't had a smoke for a few days.

Just out of interest, did you look at these >> Pentagon Animations (http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/) << have a look at number two, 'Fluid'.

[lynx]

I've tried a couple of times to download the main simulation video, but gave up after 30 mins. I assume their server was overloaded.

I haven't had chance to see the one's you've linked to yet, I'll try to look at them tomorrow. One thing though, did you notice the title of number 2 - wing w/o ribs.

I thought this was supposed to be a meaningful representation. AFAIK there is no such thing as a (operational) wing w/o ribs. Jeez, no wonder they made the assumption it liquefied, I shouldn't think a wing made like that would even have to hit anything to fall apart.

Update, I had time to have a quick look at the ones under heading 2.

Did you notice something?

They are animating a full right hand wing.

The same wing that could not possibly have fitted through the hole in the outside of the building.

Unless of course it was a lot smaller.

In which case it wasn't from a 757 :w00t:

Comments?

[whypikonme]

Did YOU notice that it wasn't the wing that cut through the columns, it was the fuel?

Fluid (http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/image1/wing3b.gif)

This was the wing .. Wing (http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/image1/wing3d.gif)

[lynx]

Did YOU notice that it wasn't the wing that cut through the columns, it was the fuel?

Fluid (http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/image1/wing3b.gif)

This was the wing .. Wing (http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/image1/wing3d.gif)
I noticed their supposition.

But which would you have me believe?
1) the aircraft was a 757.
2) their supposition is correct and it wasn't a 757.

Or are you suggesting that it was a 757 but the fuel pulled itself in so that it could get through the hole, then stretched itself back to its original shape in order to perform the pillar cutting act. :wacko:

[whypikonme]

Did YOU notice that it wasn't the wing that cut through the columns, it was the fuel?

Fluid (http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/image1/wing3b.gif)

This was the wing .. Wing (http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/image1/wing3d.gif)
I noticed their supposition.

But which would you have me believe?
1) the aircraft was a 757.
2) their supposition is correct and it wasn't a 757.

Or are you suggesting that it was a 757 but the fuel pulled itself in so that it could get through the hole, then stretched itself back to its original shape in order to perform the pillar cutting act. :wacko:

l'm not making any claims at all, just looking at animations that the authors claim should not be taken as gospel.

[whypikonme]

http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/1641/pent021mm.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/4356/pent033jo.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[j2k4]

i believe the towers were destroyed by explosives...

i'd like to see someone dispute this though :rolleyes:

Alright.

I have been more-or-less absent from the board lately, not only because of the latest "missing threads/pilfered password" debacle, but because of my disgust at the direction of this thread and the defective thought-processes which allow people to entertain wild, conspiratorial and stupid speculations such as the one evinced above.

That anyone would prefer to believe such easily-debunked drivel is beyond me, but there it is.

My own favorite and resident conspiracy theorist (quoted^) says, without any qualifying evidence, that metal buildings cannot be significantly damaged by fire, and for such a building to collapse would absolutely require carefully placed explosive charges throughout.

Well, here's the stupid-simple explanation for that which has so profoundly baffled you all and leads you so wildly astray:

The inner girders which spanned and tied together the outer skeleton of the WTC were sprayed (during construction) with a fire and heat resistant retardant which should have been sufficient to withstand any normally anticipated fire event, however not one which also involved a 500+ MPH impact, courtesy of a terrorist piloting several hundred tons of airliner and carrying many thousands of gallons of jet fuel.

What actually resulted is so simple even you should be able to understand it, Dave.

The impact literally blasted the insulation from the beams, exposing them to the heat of the fires, depleting their temper and causing them to sag under the weight of the intact structure above the impact area.

The beams eventually gave way at the points they fastened to the outer skeleton, allowing the upper floors to fall through the impact area relatively unfettered and continue downward with the resultant "pancake" effect causing the outward trajectory of glass and concrete, etc., that you inanely ascribe to explosive charges.

In any case I'd think you and all the other conspiracy-mongers here would have tumbled to the rather obvious fact that, for your idiotic scenario to be feasible, the points at which the two collapses were to begin would have had to be known beforehand by the pilots of the hijacked planes (for aiming purposes, you see), and, if that were the case, both pilots would most likely have hit each tower at precisely the same altitude and attitude.

The second impact is the best refutation of your cockeyed "theory", as the plane's trajectory, relative to the first impact, must be considered as wildly imprecise.

Lastly, the correct deduction is cemented firmly by the fact that the south tower collapsed first, due to no other reason than that the impact area was significantly lower than the first, causing the greater weight above the impact point to be brought to bear sooner.

I believe your argument is in shambles, unless you would now care to posit that your "explosive charges" were placed and energized post-impact...

And just think-I didn't have to google a thing.

[JPaul]

Now that makes sense to me. I can see that as being a reasonable and sensible description of what happened.

[j2k4]

Now that makes sense to me. I can see that as being a reasonable and sensible description of what happened.

Odd, wouldn't you say, that nobody apart from we two is so afflicted with reason and sense? ;)

[GepperRankins]

i believe the towers were destroyed by explosives...

i'd like to see someone dispute this though :rolleyes:

Alright.

I have been more-or-less absent from the board lately, not only because of the latest "missing threads/pilfered password" debacle, but because of my disgust at the direction of this thread and the defective thought-processes which allow people to entertain wild, conspiratorial and stupid speculations such the one evinced above.

That anyone would prefer to believe such easily-debunked drivel is beyond me, but there it is.

My own favorite and resident conspiracy theorist (quoted^) says, without any qualifying evidence, that metal buildings cannot be significantly damaged by fire, and for such a building to collapse would absolutely require carefully placed explosive charges throughout.

Well, here's the stupid-simple explanation for that which has so profoundly baffled you all and leads you so wildly astray:

The inner girders which spanned and tied together the outer skeleton of the WTC were sprayed (during construction) with a fire and heat resistant retardant which should have been sufficient to withstand any normally anticipated fire event, however not one which also involved a 500+ MPH impact, courtesy of a terrorist piloting several hundred tons of airliner and carrying many thousands of gallons of jet fuel.

What actually resulted is so simple even you should be able to understand it, Dave.

The impact literally blasted the insulation from the beams, exposing them to the heat of the fires, depleting their temper and causing them to sag under the weight of the intact structure above the impact area.

The beams eventually gave way at the points they fastened to the outer skeleton, allowing the upper floors to fall through the impact area relatively unfettered and continue downward with the resultant "pancake" effect causing the outward trajectory of glass and concrete, etc., that you inanely ascribe to explosive charges.

In any case I'd think you and all the other conspiracy-mongers here would have tumbled to the rather obvious fact that, for your idiotic scenario to be feasible, the points at which the two collapses were to begin would have had to be known beforehand by the pilots of the hijacked planes (for aiming purposes, you see), and, if that were the case, both pilots would most likely have hit each tower at precisely the same altitude and attitude.

The second impact is the best refutation of your cockeyed "theory", as the plane's trajectory, relative to the first impact, must be considered as wildly imprecise.

Lastly, the correct deduction is cemented firmly by the fact that the south tower collapsed first, due to no other reason than that the impact area was significantly lower than the first, causing the greater weight above the impact point to be brought to bear sooner.

I believe your argument is in shambles, unless you would now care to posit that your "explosive charges" were placed and energized post-impact...

And just think-I didn't have to google a thing.
you might wanna read up on the thread about the fact that the fires were out, the heat jet fuel burns doesn't melt steel, other buildings have burned for weeks and not collapsed, the blasts seen (and caught on photo) coming out of the building below where the planes hit and many other reasons why what you just said falls flat on it's face.

[Rat Faced]

Nah... just the fact that the way they fell defy the laws of Gravity would suffice..

ie:
The buildings fell at the same speed as the rubble outside the building.

The scenario kev paints, then they would have been falling floor to floor, with a slight delay at each floor until it gave way.. in otherwords, the building would have fell slower than the unrestricted crap outside.

It also doesnt explain how the whole building fell straight down, and the fact that the insulation would only have been blown off only a very small part of the steel... not the whole structure.

The way the press hung around the skyscraper in Spain for a week while it burned at a higher temperature than the towers, waiting for a collapse that never came was an eye opener. ;)



Now, you know we love conspiracy theories much more than kev does.

As an example, Red Dwarf adequatly explained JFK's assasination. It was, after all, more believable than the official version and most of the conspiracy theories.. I am now perfectly satisfied on that one. :ph34r:

[GepperRankins]

what about the motives for doing this. i doubt out of all the people supposedly involved (according to the government) none of them realised how incredibly counter productive this would be. in fact i wonder if anyone can work out how anyone but the american and isreali governments benefits from this

[JPaul]

"The building fell at the same speed as the rubble outside the building."

Please explain this and why you have a problem with it, within a Newtonian interpretation of gravity and terminal velocity.

I seriously have no idea what point people are trying to make when they post things like that.

[JPaul]

what about the motives for doing this. i doubt out of all the people supposedly involved (according to the government) none of them realised how incredibly counter productive this would be. in fact i wonder if anyone can work out how anyone but the american and isreali governments benefits from this
Is that supposed to be serious.

[GepperRankins]

didn't newton say something about equal and opposite forces or something?

[GepperRankins]

what about the motives for doing this. i doubt out of all the people supposedly involved (according to the government) none of them realised how incredibly counter productive this would be. in fact i wonder if anyone can work out how anyone but the american and isreali governments benefits from this
Is that supposed to be serious.
yeah, you gonna dispute it then?

[Rat Faced]

"The building fell at the same speed as the rubble outside the building."

Please explain this and why you have a problem with it, within a Newtonian interpretation of gravity and terminal velocity.

I seriously have no idea what point people are trying to make when they post things like that.

The "Cushioning" effect of the floors as they pancaked would have prevented the collapsing building reaching terminal velocity. The crap outside had no such restrictions and would have done so..

The fact that they both fell at the same speed means that the top of the building was also falling at terminal velocity ie: There was no "cushioning" from the floors collapsing through impact from the floors above.

This means the floors below had already collapsed before the ones above reached them.. ie: They did not "pancake" as j2 puts it.

[Rat Faced]

what about the motives for doing this. i doubt out of all the people supposedly involved (according to the government) none of them realised how incredibly counter productive this would be. in fact i wonder if anyone can work out how anyone but the american and isreali governments benefits from this

I can name a few...

Oil Companies, Arms/Munitions Manufacturers and Military Contractors.

Unless you have evidence that any member(s) of the US/Israeli administration is/are involved in any of these Industries, I insist you withdraw that monstrous allegation.

[GepperRankins]

what about the motives for doing this. i doubt out of all the people supposedly involved (according to the government) none of them realised how incredibly counter productive this would be. in fact i wonder if anyone can work out how anyone but the american and isreali governments benefits from this

I can name a few...

Oil Companies, Arms/Munitions Manufacturers and Military Contractors.

Unless you have evidence that any member(s) of the US/Israeli administration is/are involved in any of these Industries, I insist you withdraw that monstrous allegation.
halli-what?

[JPaul]

"The building fell at the same speed as the rubble outside the building."

Please explain this and why you have a problem with it, within a Newtonian interpretation of gravity and terminal velocity.

I seriously have no idea what point people are trying to make when they post things like that.

The "Cushioning" effect of the floors as they pancaked would have prevented the collapsing building reaching terminal velocity. The crap outside had no such restrictions and would have done so..

The fact that they both fell at the same speed means that the top of the building was also falling at terminal velocity ie: There was no "cushioning" from the floors collapsing through impact from the floors above.

This means the floors below had already collapsed before the ones above reached them.. ie: They did not "pancake" as j2 puts it.


And what is your problem with this. The big feckin missile hitting the building may have caused lower floors to collapse, before the debris hit them. Or do you think that it hit 1 floor, which then collapsed on top of the others, which then fell.

I suspect that some of the energy was transferred elsewhere at the point of impact. A shock wave throughout the building which weakened the structure, not just at the point of impact.

Some sort of interweb, quasi-physics suggesting that the building did not collapse properly does not constitute evidence that the whole thing was staged. That really is just mentalist talk.

[JPaul]

Is that supposed to be serious.
yeah, you gonna dispute it then?
A group wants Jihad at all costs.

They attack the foundation of the Western World.

The Western World retaliates.

The group then calls on it's "followers" to fight against the infidel oppresor.

This galvanizes anti-Western sentiment.

Feck, that would work.

[GepperRankins]

so the buildings stood for nearly an hour before the initial shock managed to disinterate the steel and concrete core. i wish i hadn't skived all those physics lessons :(

[Cheese]

i believe the towers were destroyed by explosives...

i'd like to see someone dispute this though :rolleyes:

Alright.

I have been more-or-less absent from the board lately, not only because of the latest "missing threads/pilfered password" debacle, but because of my disgust at the direction of this thread and the defective thought-processes which allow people to entertain wild, conspiratorial and stupid speculations such the one evinced above.

That anyone would prefer to believe such easily-debunked drivel is beyond me, but there it is.

My own favorite and resident conspiracy theorist (quoted^) says, without any qualifying evidence, that metal buildings cannot be significantly damaged by fire, and for such a building to collapse would absolutely require carefully placed explosive charges throughout.

Well, here's the stupid-simple explanation for that which has so profoundly baffled you all and leads you so wildly astray:

The inner girders which spanned and tied together the outer skeleton of the WTC were sprayed (during construction) with a fire and heat resistant retardant which should have been sufficient to withstand any normally anticipated fire event, however not one which also involved a 500+ MPH impact, courtesy of a terrorist piloting several hundred tons of airliner and carrying many thousands of gallons of jet fuel.

What actually resulted is so simple even you should be able to understand it, Dave.

The impact literally blasted the insulation from the beams, exposing them to the heat of the fires, depleting their temper and causing them to sag under the weight of the intact structure above the impact area.

The beams eventually gave way at the points they fastened to the outer skeleton, allowing the upper floors to fall through the impact area relatively unfettered and continue downward with the resultant "pancake" effect causing the outward trajectory of glass and concrete, etc., that you inanely ascribe to explosive charges.

In any case I'd think you and all the other conspiracy-mongers here would have tumbled to the rather obvious fact that, for your idiotic scenario to be feasible, the points at which the two collapses were to begin would have had to be known beforehand by the pilots of the hijacked planes (for aiming purposes, you see), and, if that were the case, both pilots would most likely have hit each tower at precisely the same altitude and attitude.

The second impact is the best refutation of your cockeyed "theory", as the plane's trajectory, relative to the first impact, must be considered as wildly imprecise.

Lastly, the correct deduction is cemented firmly by the fact that the south tower collapsed first, due to no other reason than that the impact area was significantly lower than the first, causing the greater weight above the impact point to be brought to bear sooner.

I believe your argument is in shambles, unless you would now care to posit that your "explosive charges" were placed and energized post-impact...

And just think-I didn't have to google a thing.

It's an interesting rebuttal but, surely, you could have managed it without the childish insults. No wonder people have fun deleting your posts...

[Rat Faced]

The "Cushioning" effect of the floors as they pancaked would have prevented the collapsing building reaching terminal velocity. The crap outside had no such restrictions and would have done so..

The fact that they both fell at the same speed means that the top of the building was also falling at terminal velocity ie: There was no "cushioning" from the floors collapsing through impact from the floors above.

This means the floors below had already collapsed before the ones above reached them.. ie: They did not "pancake" as j2 puts it.


And what is your problem with this. The big feckin missile hitting the building may have caused lower floors to collapse, before the debris hit them. Or do you think that it hit 1 floor, which then collapsed on top of the others, which then fell.

I was desputing a point that the building collapsed through "pancaking" nothing more. This means that one floor WOULD have collapsed onto the floor below causing a collapse onto the one below, and so on..

I suspect that some of the energy was transferred elsewhere at the point of impact. A shock wave throughout the building which weakened the structure, not just at the point of impact.

I suspect that would be true. As the "Missile" hit one side of a building however, then that shockwave would have had disproportionate effects. The Shockwave would have had a more de-stabling effect on one side of the building to the other.. the collapse would therefore not have been straight down, it would have been in the direction of weakness, if this shockwave was powerful enough to cause the collapse.

Some sort of interweb, quasi-physics suggesting that the building did not collapse properly does not constitute evidence that the whole thing was staged. That really is just mentalist talk.

I am merely knocking things that other people post at the moment.

I think there are plenty of suspicious things about it, and a great deal of coincidence. That does not mean that I think the American Government destroyed the Twin Towers.. just that there are an awfull lot of coincidence and that I think the US Government is covering something up.

Why they are doing this, i couldnt tell you..

[JPaul]

so the buildings stood for nearly an hour before the initial shock managed to disinterate the steel and concrete core. i wish i hadn't skived all those physics lessons :(
Would that they were the only ones you skived.

[JPaul]

And what is your problem with this. The big feckin missile hitting the building may have caused lower floors to collapse, before the debris hit them. Or do you think that it hit 1 floor, which then collapsed on top of the others, which then fell.

I was desputing a point that the building collapsed through "pancaking" nothing more. This means that one floor WOULD have collapsed onto the floor below causing a collapse onto the one below, and so on..

I suspect that some of the energy was transferred elsewhere at the point of impact. A shock wave throughout the building which weakened the structure, not just at the point of impact.

I suspect that would be true. As the "Missile" hit one side of a building however, then that shockwave would have had disproportionate effects. The Shockwave would have had a more de-stabling effect on one side of the building to the other.. the collapse would therefore not have been straight down, it would have been in the direction of weakness, if this shockwave was powerful enough to cause the collapse.

Some sort of interweb, quasi-physics suggesting that the building did not collapse properly does not constitute evidence that the whole thing was staged. That really is just mentalist talk.

I am merely knocking things that other people post at the moment.

I think there are plenty of suspicious things about it, and a great deal of coincidence. That does not mean that I think the American Government destroyed the Twin Towers.. just that there are an awfull lot of coincidence and that I think the US Government is covering something up.

Why they are doing this, i couldnt tell you..

I'm not having a go at you, just anyone who decides to post pish re how the towers should have fallen in those circumstances.

They were (perhaps) the largest buildings in the World. They were hit by commercial planes travelling at high speed, full of jet fuel which then exploded.

There are few people in the World who are competent to opine on what the consequences would be.

I would suggest that the select band who are competent to do so are unlikely to be authoring interweb conspiracy theory sites. They are probably rather too busy for that.

There is no point in forming theories based on a common sense understanding of physics, because the circumstances are just too outlandish.

[j2k4]

you might wanna read up on the thread about the fact that the fires were out,

Where did you read such tripe?

The fires were most definitely not "out".

I would have thought your morbid fascination with such things would have revealed that this could not possibly be true...

the heat jet fuel burns doesn't melt steel,

Not familiar with any aspect at all of that phenomenon known to the rest of us as "heat" eh?

It was plenty sufficient to cause the metal to sag, which was all that was required.

Your supposition ignores anything already there the jet fuel might have ignited, too, but that is exactly the type of basic mistake you continually make, Dave.

other buildings have burned for weeks and not collapsed,

Oh, yes-all those other buildings just like the WTC on WTC row in NYC, all built with the same physical characteristics and construction technologies as the WTC that were hit by planes...yes, it is a structural engineer's favorite demolition exercise, known to all in the field.

The WTC's construction was a first of it's kind, Dave.

Just in case no one ever informed you of the fact.

the blasts seen (and caught on photo) coming out of the building below where the planes hit...

...were not blasts at all.

You have allowed yourself to be misled; I can't put it any more simply.

and many other reasons why what you just said falls flat on it's face.

Not even close, Dave.

Rat:

With all due respect, your theory doesn't hold water, either.

A building a quarter-mile high will fall quite quickly if compromised as the WTC was; it you've viewed the film as many times as I have, the slightness in the difference in the speed at which the building and the attendent and adjacent debris fell is of no consequence whatsoever, no matter what the conspiracy.

Air is not like water, especially when the "air" is mostly concrete and steel.

[j2k4]

Alright.

I have been more-or-less absent from the board lately, not only because of the latest "missing threads/pilfered password" debacle, but because of my disgust at the direction of this thread and the defective thought-processes which allow people to entertain wild, conspiratorial and stupid speculations such the one evinced above.

That anyone would prefer to believe such easily-debunked drivel is beyond me, but there it is.

My own favorite and resident conspiracy theorist (quoted^) says, without any qualifying evidence, that metal buildings cannot be significantly damaged by fire, and for such a building to collapse would absolutely require carefully placed explosive charges throughout.

Well, here's the stupid-simple explanation for that which has so profoundly baffled you all and leads you so wildly astray:

The inner girders which spanned and tied together the outer skeleton of the WTC were sprayed (during construction) with a fire and heat resistant retardant which should have been sufficient to withstand any normally anticipated fire event, however not one which also involved a 500+ MPH impact, courtesy of a terrorist piloting several hundred tons of airliner and carrying many thousands of gallons of jet fuel.

What actually resulted is so simple even you should be able to understand it, Dave.

The impact literally blasted the insulation from the beams, exposing them to the heat of the fires, depleting their temper and causing them to sag under the weight of the intact structure above the impact area.

The beams eventually gave way at the points they fastened to the outer skeleton, allowing the upper floors to fall through the impact area relatively unfettered and continue downward with the resultant "pancake" effect causing the outward trajectory of glass and concrete, etc., that you inanely ascribe to explosive charges.

In any case I'd think you and all the other conspiracy-mongers here would have tumbled to the rather obvious fact that, for your idiotic scenario to be feasible, the points at which the two collapses were to begin would have had to be known beforehand by the pilots of the hijacked planes (for aiming purposes, you see), and, if that were the case, both pilots would most likely have hit each tower at precisely the same altitude and attitude.

The second impact is the best refutation of your cockeyed "theory", as the plane's trajectory, relative to the first impact, must be considered as wildly imprecise.

Lastly, the correct deduction is cemented firmly by the fact that the south tower collapsed first, due to no other reason than that the impact area was significantly lower than the first, causing the greater weight above the impact point to be brought to bear sooner.

I believe your argument is in shambles, unless you would now care to posit that your "explosive charges" were placed and energized post-impact...

And just think-I didn't have to google a thing.

It's an interesting rebuttal but, surely, you could have managed it without the childish insults. No wonder people have fun deleting your posts...

Cheese, I'm quite sure, were you the one posting this pish, you could have presented it and your emphases without that particular style which provokes me.

Consider my response tailored specifically to the participants I have offended with my remarks, for I did indeed intend to offend them, and not you.

I take your point, but without any guilt whatsoever.

If I had summoned the nerve to similarly question the events of 7/7 to young Dave, perhaps you have him on the carpet just now, eh?

[JPaul]

Air is not like water, especially when the "air" is mostly concrete and steel.
[/COLOR][/I]
Are you saying that the debris "outside of the building" was not actually in free fall as we have been led to believe.

Feck, you'll be suggesting that some of it may have been the subject of upward forces next. Something like the air being forced back up, or turbulance, or some other such mad talk.

Grow up man, there were explosives strategically placed, by the US Government, in one of it's principal financial centres. It's the only sensible explanation.

[j2k4]

Air is not like water, especially when the "air" is mostly concrete and steel.
[/COLOR][/I]
Are you saying that the debris "outside of the building" was not actually in free fall as we have been led to believe.

Feck, you'll be suggesting that some of it may have been the subject of upward forces next. Something like the air being forced back up, or turbulance, or some other such mad talk.

Grow up man, there were explosives strategically placed, by the US Government, in one of it's principal financial centres. It's the only sensible explanation.

That's it, then.

I'm convinced. :P

[whypikonme]

Odd, wouldn't you say, that nobody apart from we two is so afflicted with reason and sense? ;)

l resent that, you're not the only one here to oppose the conspiracy theories, it didn't take you long to climb back aboard your high horse, did it?

[j2k4]

Odd, wouldn't you say, that nobody apart from we two is so afflicted with reason and sense? ;)

l resent that, you're not the only one here to oppose the conspiracy theories, it didn't take you long to climb back aboard your high horse, did it?

You will always find me astride a taller horse; it is my choice of moral steed.

I have not been off her since I joined this hellhole, and it is for that reason I am periodically absented, I imagine-however you would have to consult the culprit to be sure. ;)

[j2k4]

Odd, wouldn't you say, that nobody apart from we two is so afflicted with reason and sense? ;)

l resent that, you're not the only one here to oppose the conspiracy theories...

Ah, yes...forgot my manners for a cyber-moment-I hereby openly recognize your distinct and unmistakable rejection of the conspiracies presented in this thread. ;)

Mea maxima culpa. :)

[Busyman]

l resent that, you're not the only one here to oppose the conspiracy theories...

Ah, yes...forgot my manners for a cyber-moment-I hereby openly recognize your distinct and unmistakable rejection of the conspiracies presented in this thread. ;)

Mea maxima culpa. :)
I, as well, don't subscribe to these theories (except the Pennsylvania crash but I came to that conclusion by my lonesome). However, I don't discount everything either. Some of these theories do sound far-fetched.

[j2k4]

Ah, yes...forgot my manners for a cyber-moment-I hereby openly recognize your distinct and unmistakable rejection of the conspiracies presented in this thread. ;)

Mea maxima culpa. :)
I, as well, don't subscribe to these theories (except the Pennsylvania crash but I came to that conclusion by my lonesome). However, I don't discount everything either. Some of these theories do sound far-fetched.

Your exception is noted also.

I should also apologize to our Dave, as I only identified him (among several others) by name in my post.

It was rude of me.

Rat gets nothing, 'cuz he was just wishy-washy. ;)

[Busyman]

I, as well, don't subscribe to these theories (except the Pennsylvania crash but I came to that conclusion by my lonesome). However, I don't discount everything either. Some of these theories do sound far-fetched.

Your exception is noted also.
Why thank you kind sir.

I feel better now and can go to sleep. I'm sitting here falling asleep on my music equipment and haven't belted out anything new in the last 30 minutes.
I keep letting the same loop play that I've recorded over and over and ov....