More 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Options

[Hartmann]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801

More fuel to the fire...

[Hartmann]

One factual error... They claim a B-52 hit the Empire State building, but it was a B-25. Big difference. One is a jet, the other is a prop plane.

[Divergent Realit...]

interesting so far. gonna pause it after they started the 'what were the towers made of'

and the pentagon still doesnt sit right with me.

didnt sit right with me back then either.

BIG PLANE

tiny hole

doesnt add up.

i wish i had a time machine, go ahead 25-50 years and see what they have to say.

[schwab]

god damn this is long

[schwab]

but so far interesting

[woody]

BIG PLANE

tiny hole

doesnt add up.

lube

[Divergent Realit...]

lube

damn.

thats the first thing they teach you in sex ed.

why didnt i think of that?

[woody]

damn.

thats the first thing they teach you in sex ed.

why didnt i think of that?

cause your mommy didn't sign the permission slip for you to go to the sex ed class in elem. school

[Testm0nkey]

psh nicks mom was sex ed in elementary school

ill watch this and make a profound statement later

[Spectatrix]

i wish i had a time machine, go ahead 25-50 years and see what they have to say.

Why not go back 5 years and get a closer view of things?

[FORSAKENR320]

psh nicks mom was sex ed in elementary school

ill watch this and make a profound statement later

profound enough in my opinion



HIYOOOOO!

[FORSAKENR320]

Why not go back 5 years and get a closer view of things?

EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING




i may even try to make myself a hero


not like anything bad would have changed much.... i was a freshman in the tech dorms already... no fear of me never being born, and i have no regard for what the future is.... who cares if a few people no longer exist as long as i'm selfishly better off?

[Spectatrix]

i may even try to make myself a hero

You know, I've thought about that before. But how would you go about doing it so as to not get arrested or thrown in the loony bin? I'm thinking something like calling in a bomb threat or setting off fire alarms (with a few small fires too, of course) would be the most effective ways to get people out of the towers.

[FORSAKENR320]

You know, I've thought about that before.  But how would you go about doing it so as to not get arrested or thrown in the loony bin?  I'm thinking something like calling in a bomb threat or setting off fire alarms (with a few small fires too, of course) would be the most effective ways to get people out of the towers.

the trick is to not be too successful


i think the best way would have been to been a flight attendant for the specific plane that hit 2nd, or even just a passanger. had actual identities of the people who hi jacked it, and smuggled a weapon on board (obviously much easier if you were a flight attendant) then planted papers saying that there was a 2nd plane heading towards 1 of 3 different other targets, 1 of which would be the twin towers, of course, on the guys, and when they began to try shit, capped some derka derka ass. odds are that by the time things had gotten straightened out, due to communication mishaps, the 2nd plane prolly would have hit anyway, proving that there was an actual threat, and i wasn't just some crazy bastard with a gun.


my valiant efforts would have been noted, the government would have used me as a patriotic hero in the propaganda right afterwards that was used to stir america into a frenzy, as a red blooded texan i would have been elevated even higher than that, and as long as i made myself constantly in the spot light, i may have even been able to apply for office in the state after a period of time.


Heroism is most successful with government backing

[Divergent Realit...]

that video does leave a pretty bad taste in your mouth.

[Hartmann]

The thing that I don't agree with is the steel research done for the twin towers. From what I've read, steel does not have to melt for it to lose its integrity, instead, it just has to reach a certain temperature (below 2,000 degrees) before certain things happen to the alloys within it.

The Osama bin Laden facts were interesting.

[Jim]

No clue...

Is this the same thing as the one they did earlier? Or is it different?

[impala454]

only a few minutes in, but what I don't understand is why they're so surprised about all the warnings and cancelled flights by politicians in power. i mean, i'm sure a few days before all the intelligence reports would have been booming with threats of possible plane hijackings.

and the thing about that info packet coming out w/the WTC in the crosshairs... why is that so surprising when the WTC bombing in 1993 was a fairly recent (if not the most recent?) terrorist attack on our soil.

[Jim]

only a few minutes in, but what I don't understand is why they're so surprised about all the warnings and cancelled flights by politicians in power. i mean, i'm sure a few days before all the intelligence reports would have been booming with threats of possible plane hijackings.

Why just cancel "important" people's flights? Whynot cancel ALL flights?

[impala454]

we don't know what kind of pre-information they had. It sounds to me like they didn't deem it a high enough threat to warrant shutting down all air travel in the US (which is a very drastic measure if you're not absolutely 100% certain there's a threat).

[impala454]

"big box being carried out of the pentagon with a tarp over it, why the mystery"

uh it's the pentagon... might be a few secret items in there but it's just me.

[impala454]

OMG a US military helicopter near the pentagon... no way

[Divergent Realit...]

you can check out the kompressor song tunak tunak tun

this song was put out in 98 if i remember right

Tunak Tunak Tun, Tunak Tunak Tun
Tunak Tunak Tun, Da Da Da
Tunak Tunak Tun, Tunak Tunak Tun
Tunak Tunak Tun, Da Da Da

KOMPRESSOR crushing American people
KOMPRESSOR driving cars into stores
KOMPRESSOR crushing all of Manhattan
KOMPRESSOR flying plane into building

Tunak Tunak Tun, Tunak Tunak Tun
Tunak Tunak Tun, Da Da Da
Tunak Tunak Tun, Tunak Tunak Tun
Tunak Tunak Tun, Da Da Da


the idea has been out there.

[impala454]

OMG no way military planes allowed to fly after a terrorist attack..

[impala454]

burning buildings don't collapse... oh yeah probably unless it's burning JET FUEL.

[Divergent Realit...]

maybe save the comments till you finish, instead of a play by play?

[impala454]

heh the guy compares titanium from the periodic table... i'm sure it's 100% pure titanium in a plane.

[impala454]

maybe save the comments till you finish, instead of a play by play?

well there's so much stupid shit i know i'll forget most of it by the time it's over

[Divergent Realit...]

then just wait till its over and post in large bold letters HORSE SHIT

[impala454]

"majority of the fuel burning outside the building"? how the hell do you figure that?

and collapsing too fast... hmm 20-30 floors worth of buliding falling 10-12 feet... hmm doubt that would take a building down very fast...

[impala454]

then just wait till its over and post in large bold letters HORSE SHIT

heh well i'll prob do that anyways

[impala454]

one thing i dont get is if they're taking all these eye witness accounts and talking about them real time on the news, how come all these accounts are saying a plane hit the pentagon?

it's also extremely surprising to me that there could be secondary explosions in a building that's a virtual self-contained city burning with jet fuel.

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

videos like this have to be taken with a grain of salt.

The whole pentagon thing we've been over. i still believe it absolutely could have been the jet plane...

the whole releasing the videos that pointed at the pentagon thing is legit, but in the jfk assassination there was "video confiscated and not returned" and we know that the conspiracy there is crap.... its just the gov. not putting a priority on giving back stuff they used as evidence.

oh, and the whole gold being moved ignores the fact that it could have been moving on a normal day too... so big deal.


The only thing i see that im like WTF MATE would be the one building collapsing due to fire. The twins where hit with extreme force to weaken its structure before they fell (so helps to explain why they fell), but the other building that fell is interesting.

It trys to show the explosions that where used in the dropping of the towers... BY PUTTING PURPLE BOXES OVER THEM. Show me them in real time, because they could be a number of different things (like the supports buckeling at that spot).

hell google gave me this: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
which has a video about the layout of the wtc, and why its different construction compared to other "normal" high rises could have let it be more inclined to fall.
Hell it kind of explains those supposed "explosions" as the supports falling downward and hitting the windows.

so, yeah... not so convinced yet... occam's razor to me still shows terror attacks, call me crazy. Like what would have been the point at all for the plane that crashed in the field?... (or didn't, whatever). it didn't serve any purpose to take those people off the plane, hide them, and pretend they just randomly crashed in a field. Give me a break

[impala454]

yeah cell phones probably don't work at cruising altitude... but i'm sure terrorists who've hijacked a plane make sure to stay at cruising altitude.

[impala454]

lol it's not bin laden, he was wearing teh gold ring!

[impala454]

aight i'm done (slow day at work)

i'll admit a few things in there are kinda questionable, but on the whole it's just a bunch of small details and sorta half truths that are easily put together to look any way you want. throw in some dramatic music and scrolling text to add emotion and you've got yourself something that will easily convince stupid people.

[schwab]

the pentagon and field crash are the ones i question....wtc not as much

[impala454]

well i could see them covering the pentagon up if that wasn't a plane. it would be mega embarassing to the country and scare the crap out of the whole country that terrorists could get inside the pentagon enough to plant a bomb.

but the idea that we bombed the pentagon ourselves seems pretty off the wall to me. i don't see much motive anywhere.

[schwab]

well i could see them covering the pentagon up if that wasn't a plane. it would be mega embarassing to the country and scare the crap out of the whole country that terrorists could get inside the pentagon enough to plant a bomb.

but the idea that we bombed the pentagon ourselves seems pretty off the wall to me. i don't see much motive anywhere.

but just the fact that none of the plane was around....that just seems really sketchy

as well as the plane that crashed in penn...where the hell is the plane?

one last thing....i really dont see how you "can" phoen from a plane, you can use the plane phones which is reasonable...but not cell phones like they said some people did do

[GOB]

i've seen several videos of bigass plane crashes, and most of the time, almost nothing is left. it's total destruction.

these things were going close to 600 mph, whereas most crashes happen on takeoff or landing, when they're nowhere near their max speed. the subsequent fire didn't help, either, because whatever was left was covered in burning jet fuel, and neither of the two locations outside new york had video coverage for a good amount of time after the crashes.



i'll try to find links to some good videos

[schwab]

i've seen several videos of bigass plane crashes, and most of the time, almost nothing is left. it's total destruction.

these things were going close to 600 mph, whereas most crashes happen on takeoff or landing, when they're nowhere near their max speed. the subsequent fire didn't help, either, because whatever was left was covered in burning jet fuel, and neither of the two locations outside new york had video coverage for a good amount of time after the crashes.



i'll try to find links to some good videos

even in the ones that happen in mid air....the engines are some large pieces are usually still in tact, however, there was more or less no metal in either of those 2 crashes shown

[nickluto]

It trys to show the explosions that where used in the dropping of the towers... BY PUTTING PURPLE BOXES OVER THEM. Show me them in real time, because they could be a number of different things (like the supports buckeling at that spot).

thats what i thought. being a 15 year old high school kid at the time when i saw the towers go down i thought there were bombs int he building.

but imagine the force of gravity "pulling down" on the floors above, and the amount of energy they would release if the support structures were compromised, and the "explosion" you see is just about right.


I think the only thing that i really question is how the plane in Pennsylvania crashed. ive read that there were reports of laboratories in the area measuring seismic activity detecing small disturbances that were "reportedly" the same magnitude that a sonic boom would produce and plane trash (flight mags, material) found in a lake up to a mile away.

I think that the plane might have been shot down by a military aircraft (it's well within the realm of possibility) , but at the same time dont really fault the government with covering it up.

If it did come out that it was shot down, you would have a military pilot come under investigation who had to was ordered and carried out the unspeakable; shoot down a civilian airliner. I think the guilt that he/she might already be faced with would be overkill as is.

[Hartmann]

yeah cell phones probably don't work at cruising altitude... but i'm sure terrorists who've hijacked a plane make sure to stay at cruising altitude.

? My cell phone works at cruising altitude.


I think the point that he was trying to make with the titanium thing is that with titanium within the allow of the aircraft, the creation of a "thermite" fire would have been near impossible. A lot of people have speculated that the metals in the airplane and the WTC when heated created a even hotter reaction, I'm not sure though.

I wish they would release the videos from the gas station and from the hotel, that would clear things up.

There is always things left after a plane crash, no matter the magnitude. Even the AirTran Airways flight that flew straight down into the mud of the Everglades had wreckage that was discernable in pictures and from what I've read they recovered whole chunks of the wing and the engines. It nosedived from around 7,000 feet.

I am not one for conspiracy theories but I am just confused by the whole thing.

[Spectatrix]

? My cell phone works at cruising altitude.

But what about 5 years ago?

[nickluto]

? My cell phone works at cruising altitude.


I think the point that he was trying to make with the titanium thing is that with titanium within the allow of the aircraft, the creation of a "thermite" fire would have been near impossible. A lot of people have speculated that the metals in the airplane and the WTC when heated created a even hotter reaction, I'm not sure though.

I wish they would release the videos from the gas station and from the hotel, that would clear things up.

There is always things left after a plane crash, no matter the magnitude. Even the AirTran Airways flight that flew straight down into the mud of the Everglades had wreckage that was discernable in pictures and from what I've read they recovered whole chunks of the wing and the engines. It nosedived from around 7,000 feet.

I am not one for conspiracy theories but I am just confused by the whole thing.

I read an article that reports that the CEO of Qualcomm (supplier/designer/pioneer of CDMA chipsets, system software, network base stations, handsets[i.e. cell phones as we know it]) went on the record and said that it is near impossible to get a cell signal at cruising altitude because the height and speeds involved, and that Qualcomm is still in the process of developing this technology which should be testable in Q4 2006.

[schwab]

? My cell phone works at cruising altitude.

it may work, but you wont be getting any signal

[Hartmann]

I read an article that reports that the CEO of Qualcomm (supplier/designer/pioneer of CDMA chipsets, system software, network base stations, handsets[i.e. cell phones as we know it]) went on the record and said that it is near impossible to get a cell signal at cruising altitude because the height and speeds involved, and that Qualcomm is still in the process of developing this technology which should be testable in Q4 2006.

Not sure. My Sprint phone worked on a flight from DFW to O'Hare last year (made a call from the bathroom). My buddy has used his Blackberry on a flight before as well. I think it has to do with what type of network you are on as well and how fast your phone is able to switch connections from tower to tower.

I guess I'll need to try it on another flight some time.

Also, both in 2600 and that other 'hacker' magazine there have been articles about using cellphones during flight. It's even being discussed by a lot of the airlines to allow cellphone usage during flights.

[Testm0nkey]

my dad was an AF pilot and he always said how he didnt see how the pentagon could have been flown into by commercial plane and im at the part in the video where it talks about that. im just now watching this and its pretty interesting. im going to send the link to my father and see what he says

[impala454]

on the pentagon thing... one possibility could be that a bomb was planted by the terrorists, and they'd rather go with the plane story as the thought of a terrorist getting into one of our supposedly uber secure govt buildings might scare a lot of people.

and on the titanium thing... i was makin fun of the guy bc he went to the periodic table and quoted the boiling point. that's great except i would doubt any metal on a plane is 100% pure element. ie it's titanium + a whole bunch of other crap (crap that would bring down the melting/boiling point of the metal as a whole).

[impala454]

Not sure. My Sprint phone worked on a flight from DFW to O'Hare last year (made a call from the bathroom). My buddy has used his Blackberry on a flight before as well. I think it has to do with what type of network you are on as well and how fast your phone is able to switch connections from tower to tower.

I guess I'll need to try it on another flight some time.

Also, both in 2600 and that other 'hacker' magazine there have been articles about using cellphones during flight. It's even being discussed by a lot of the airlines to allow cellphone usage during flights.

yeah i've forgotten to turn mine off and got a call before while in flight. i was just quoting the guy in the video (who said it's not possible)

[nickluto]

Not sure. My Sprint phone worked on a flight from DFW to O'Hare last year (made a call from the bathroom). My buddy has used his Blackberry on a flight before as well. I think it has to do with what type of network you are on as well and how fast your phone is able to switch connections from tower to tower.

I guess I'll need to try it on another flight some time.

Also, both in 2600 and that other 'hacker' magazine there have been articles about using cellphones during flight. It's even being discussed by a lot of the airlines to allow cellphone usage during flights.

http://physics911.net/projectachilles.htm

[Hartmann]

http://physics911.net/projectachilles.htm

I've seen that (it's what's mentioned in the video) and doesn't change the fact that I made a phone call. And I've seen other people receive phone calls during flights.

[pysex]

the wtc towers being destroyed by demolition charges is total total bullshit...


it's obvious the fires heated the steel to a point where they became flimsy and then the floors just collapsed one on top of another....there's no way heated flimsy steel can support another 20 floors above...


i still dont' know about the 3rd wtc building which just collapsed in on itself....



the pentagon...sketchy

that had to be one hell of a skilled pilot to fly a plane directly into the center of the wall and not touch the lawn but maybe a few light poles....and where's the testimony of the folks that were driving on the highway when a huge ass jet liner flies over the roofs of their cars....you seriously can't miss something like that

an no one reports being deafened by the sonic boom that would've accompanied that plane's speed....

[impala454]

yeah and once you have 20 floors worth of building falling, nothing is gonna stop it

[nickluto]

the wtc towers being destroyed by demolition charges is total total bullshit...


it's obvious the fires heated the steel to a point where they became flimsy and then the floors just collapsed one on top of another....there's no way heated flimsy steel can support another 20 floors above...


i still dont' know about the 3rd wtc building which just collapsed in on itself....



the pentagon...sketchy

that had to be one hell of a skilled pilot to fly a plane directly into the center of the wall and not touch the lawn but maybe a few light poles....and where's the testimony of the folks that were driving on the highway when a huge ass jet liner flies over the roofs of their cars....you seriously can't miss something like that

an no one reports being deafened by the sonic boom that would've accompanied that plane's speed....

Did you skip the part about the collapse time of 10 seconds is in free fall? as in there is no resistance from the intact floors? ----> the floors were weakened from the top down.

The potential energy held in the towers alone is not sufficient to dissassociate ("pulverize") concrete into 500 micron dust particles.

All the emergency crews / workers in the building reporting multiple secondary blasts from the impact up to the collapse? What about World Trade 7? It wasnt hit by a plane...


the steel was tested for up to 2000F for 8 hours to be certified for construction...so they warped under 1500F of heat in just over an hour? People were seen standing by the damaged floors...chillin....not to mention steel is a superb conductor of heat, so the core construction was basically a giant heatsink, the elevator shafts were hermetically sealed so the fire almost choked out by itself cause there was not enough oxygen to maintain it.

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

Did you skip the part about the collapse time of 10 seconds is in free fall? as in there is no resistance from the intact floors?  ----> the floors were weakened from the top down.

The potential energy held in the towers alone is not sufficient to dissassociate ("pulverize") concrete into 500 micron dust particles.

All the emergency crews / workers in the building reporting multiple secondary blasts from the impact up to the collapse? What about World Trade 7? It wasnt hit by a plane...


the steel was tested for up to 2000F for 8 hours to be certified for construction...so they warped under 1500F of heat in just over an hour? People were seen standing by the damaged floors...chillin....not to mention steel is a superb conductor of heat, so the core construction was basically a giant heatsink, the elevator shafts were hermetically sealed so the fire almost choked out by itself cause there was not enough oxygen to maintain it.

It doesn't free fall. The guy does his calculation at like 9 seconds. And 1 second is really all is needed for gravity to smash the top floors onto the bottom ones. The lower floors would not have stopped the falling floors much (if at all.)

and i love how you ONLY use heat as the reason for the building collapsing. I guess you forgot a 100 ton air plane smashed into the building and all the supports.

Not to mention you need to look at how the building is designed to begin with. It has the internal cylinder type support in the very middle and then only the outter wall supports. When the jet demolished the outter structure it put all pressure to the inner cylinder which was also damaged by the plane. GRAVITY and heat can do a LOT of damage that high in the air.

oh and those supposed "demolition blasts" blowing out the windows were just the supports buckling, falling to the floor down, and breaking the window.


Building 7 is the only one that i wonder how it fell.... but it could have been any of numerous variables (like the twins falling on it) that could be the explination.

Still not much of a conspiracy.. just decent drama music

[woody]

i still dont' know about the 3rd wtc building which just collapsed in on itself....

would that be building 7?

didn't it catch fire from 1 & 2 collapse and burned inside for hours before it collapsed. thats what the history channel said

[nickluto]

It doesn't free fall. The guy does his calculation at like 9 seconds. And 1 second is really all is needed for gravity to smash the top floors onto the bottom ones. The lower floors would not have stopped the falling floors much (if at all.)

9.2 seconds is the minimum time for any object to fall from the height of the world trade center towers to the ground in a vacuum (regardless of mass/size), unless Galelieo and Newton were wrong on that day. They desintegrated in 10 seconds....they were not in a vacuum, so ths is to be expected. Therefore, they were in what we call "free fall".

and i love how you ONLY use heat as the reason for the building collapsing. I guess you forgot a 100 ton air plane smashed into the building and all the supports.

Nuh uh. Not all the supports, unless the airplane was 110 stories tall, 250 feet wide and was made out of indestructable material. Oh, pissed off 'cause I tried to prove you wrong based on semantics? Just trying to beat you at your own game, buddy...

but okay, ill go with you, every support on the levels affected by the planes were weakened enough to be structurally compromised by a weak fire (which is an extremely huge stretch). what would you expect to happen? The entire building to start systematically falling down with no resistance until it was a pile of rubble? really? Or would you expect the top floors to collapse on the lower floors, and then have the remaining floors maybe buckle under the pressure ?(again a huge stretch... if the supports could hold the entire building up from x floor to the top, what makes the load of x floors to the top different if the floors are closer together? well, they have an acceleration, but not much of one. Constructing a building with just enough strength to support the above floors never happens, so the even if this happened the supports would have at least provided some resistance and probably caused the floors to collapse in one direction or another, NOT directly down)

Not to mention you need to look at how the building is designed to begin with. It has the internal cylinder type support in the very middle and then only the outter wall supports. When the jet demolished the outter structure it put all pressure to the inner cylinder which was also damaged by the plane.

So the second plane that was struck, which took a blow significantly more off center than the north tower collapsed first, with less damage from the resulting fire...explain your logic here?

GRAVITY and heat can do a LOT of damage that high in the air.

This statement doesnt even make sense. Can you clarify? Any high school physics professor, or even student that had completed such a class would laugh at your for even suggesting this.

oh and those supposed "demolition blasts" blowing out the windows were just the supports buckling, falling to the floor down, and breaking the window.

If you really believe this, that they were random failures in a structure destroyed by fire/being struck with an airplane then why did the towers collapse almost completely into their own footprints, with almost NO collaterall damage? Assuming all of the support structures had reletively the same loads to bear on all sides, wouldnt an "explosion" or failure of a single support somehow force the collapse in one direction or another? The coincindences that you are suggesting about random failures 30 FLOORS below the "demolition wave" is physically impossible and highly improbable.

Building 7 is the only one that i wonder how it fell.... but it could have been any of numerous variables (like the twins falling on it) that could be the explination.

both towers fell almost directly down. pretty neatly, little collateral damage right? So how can both of them fall on WTC7 with the gemoetry in mind? Even if pieces of one tower fell on it, if the supports were compromised at that time, and the building fell as a direct effect, then I might tend to agree with you, but standing just fine until hours later, and then following the same free fall collapse as the other towers (Silverstein referencing the "pulling" of the building on TV)....doesn't add up.

The only way WTC7 would have fell that neatly down into its own footprint would be by controlled demolition. Any random act itself would not produce the same effect is even suggesting so is ridiculous.


Sadly, I wouldnt have to explain any of this to you if you have taken a simple middle or high school level physics class.

[Psykopath]

I applaud you: One of the best NPR posts in a long time. =)

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

9.2 seconds is the minimum time for any object to fall from the height of the world trade center towers to the ground in a vacuum (regardless of mass/size), unless Galelieo and Newton were wrong on that day. They desintegrated in 10 seconds....they were not in a vacuum, so ths is to be expected. Therefore, they were in what we call "free fall".



Nuh uh. Not all the supports, unless the airplane was 110 stories tall, 250 feet wide and was made out of indestructable material. Oh, pissed off 'cause I tried to prove you wrong based on semantics? Just trying to beat you at your own game, buddy...

but okay, ill go with you, every support on the levels affected by the planes were weakened enough to be structurally compromised by a weak fire (which is an extremely huge stretch). what would you expect to happen? The entire building to start systematically falling down with no resistance until it was a pile of rubble? really? Or would you expect the top floors to collapse on the lower floors, and then have the remaining floors maybe buckle under the pressure ?(again a huge stretch... if the supports could hold the entire building up from x floor to the top, what makes the load of x floors to the top different if the floors are closer together? well, they have an acceleration, but not much of one. Constructing a building with just enough strength to support the above floors never happens, so the even if this happened the supports would have at least provided some resistance and probably caused the floors to collapse in one direction or another, NOT directly down)

So the second plane that was struck, which took a blow significantly more off center than the north tower collapsed first, with less damage from the resulting fire...explain your logic here?


This statement doesnt even make sense. Can you clarify?  Any high school physics professor, or even student that had completed such a class would laugh at your for even suggesting this.



If you really believe this, that they were random failures in a structure destroyed by fire/being struck with an airplane  then why did the towers collapse almost completely into their own footprints, with almost NO collaterall damage? Assuming all of the support structures had reletively the same loads to bear on all sides, wouldnt an "explosion" or failure of a single support somehow force the collapse in one direction or another? The coincindences that you are suggesting about random failures 30 FLOORS below the "demolition wave" is physically impossible and highly improbable.



both towers fell almost directly down. pretty neatly, little collateral damage right? So how can both of them fall on WTC7 with the gemoetry in mind? Even if pieces of one tower fell on it, if the supports were compromised at that time, and the building fell as a direct effect, then I might tend to agree with you, but standing just fine until hours later, and then following the same free fall collapse as the other towers (Silverstein referencing the "pulling" of the building on TV)....doesn't add up.

The only way WTC7 would have fell that neatly down into its own footprint would be by controlled demolition. Any random act itself would not produce the same effect is even suggesting so is ridiculous.


Sadly, I wouldnt have to explain any of this to you if you have taken a simple middle or high school level physics class.

sigh....

despite your very noble effort to try and cover up your "lack ofs" with insults, you still didn't prove much of anything.

Its a known fact that the structures were DESIGNED to fall straight down. Thats why the inner support system was a cylinder.

And i disagree with you about the plane you say did less damage being the one that brought down the first tower. It hit at a angle that would have done more damage to one side of the building and also the engines hit lower and higher than the body of the aircraft, thus more damage to other floors.

here is another website: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/

oops, no conspiracy theories at that one...

Im sure it was made by the government. The whole "showing how the wtc building layouts being different than most buildings" is just jibber jabber from more stupid people like me that

"Any high school physics professor, or even student that had completed such a class would laugh at"

And the example from that website of the beams connecting the inner and outer support system falling down (and hitting the structure below it) is just the same... more stupidity huh?

And i love how you think about, what: 30-40, stories of concrete and medal falling ... 10 feet even, isn't much momentum... heh. And that the lower supports could "easily" handled the extra effort because

"they were built for more than just BARELY holding up the building"

I've seen what ONE floor falling down onto another can do by simply watching the history channel. Hell the one i watched pretty much showed all the floors pancaking down on one another... straight down... and not really "stopping" the falling floors. Granted it was a building going up and the top floor gave up, the same things happening again are plausible...




Anyway, you are gonna try and make me feel stupid when you are the one believing that the government destroyed the twin towers, attacked the pentagon, and then tried to make us believe that a plane crashed in a field randomly (when it would serve no purpose)

Give me a break, get some proof (other than a stupid video with drama music) before you trying to act high and mighty.

oh, and here on that site is "an enginers explination of why the towers fell" (I WOULD COPY AND PASTE IT, BUT ITS MULTIPLE PAGES EXPLAINING WHY IT FELL STRAIGHT DOWN, WHY THE FIRES WERE HOTTER THAN EXPECTED, HOW IT WAS DESIGNED AND HOW IT "FREE FELL"... HAVE FUN):

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html



Feel free to tell me how this MIT engineer is a retard like myself

[Jyan]

The government pays to maintain PBS. They musn't be trusted.

[Testm0nkey]

i havent heard much mention (if any) in this thread about the gold that was moved/missing, the apparent almost random collapse of WTC 7 (internal fire floors down from the top from a part of the towers that fell on the building several buildings away that just happened to be offices for the fbi etc?), and the removal of guards and drug/explosive finding dogs just prior to the fall. i cant even begin to pretend i completely understand anything about the structure, building, or falling of the towers but i think everyone can agree the pentagon doesnt make any fucking sense. the whole 'missing flight 93' and the theory behind the plane switcharoo and the missing passengers seems a little deep into a paranoid conspiracy fantasy but i had never heard anything about that before. i dont know any other side to that part of the story so its damn intriguing

[Seeker]

i havent heard much mention (if any) in this thread about the gold that was moved/missing, the apparent almost random collapse of WTC 7 (internal fire floors down from the top from a part of the towers that fell on the building several buildings away that just happened to be offices for the fbi etc?), and the removal of guards and drug/explosive finding dogs just prior to the fall. i cant even begin to pretend i completely understand anything about the structure, building, or falling of the towers but i think everyone can agree the pentagon doesnt make any fucking sense. the whole 'missing flight 93' and the theory behind the plane switcharoo and the missing passengers seems a little deep into a paranoid conspiracy fantasy but i had never heard anything about that before. i dont know any other side to that part of the story so its damn intriguing

exactly, there's so many inconsistancies you know we're not getting whole story

[impala454]

exactly, there's so many inconsistancies you know we're not getting whole story

yeah because there's so many other consistent plane crash into building jet fuel fire terrorist attack type disasters to compare it to. if you can't explain something there must be a government conspiracy.

[pebkac]

Wow. I actually AGREE with one of impala's posts.

[Testm0nkey]

plane crashes are a fairly common deal and plane crashes has nothing to do with the transportation of what was it? 263 million dollars worth of gold out from under the WTC the day/week of the attack or why flight 93 is still 'in use' and was it flight 153? that is 'destroyed'. just a really suspecious deal. ha whats with the families of 'heroes of flight 93" motto

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

So you know that the gold couldn't have just been moving on a everyday normal transfer or something? Them just moving it because of NORMAL circumstances, then abandoning it during the attacks makes perfect since to me.


Honestly, everything that happened could simply have happened with a rational and reasonable explination. There is no reason to jump to "OMG the government conspiracy" just because some of the the things aren't understood.

One simple google search and i found a site that explained the discrepancies, in a rational and logical way, for the towers falling. So if something is hard to understand, try to figure out if it COULD happen naturally before jumping to the idea of conspiracy (which the idea of the government hiding something this big and requiring this many people to keep thier mouth shut is just ludicrous)

[impala454]

Wow. I actually AGREE with one of impala's posts.

[prefix]

This is just like the JFK assassination. There's concrete proof that oswald killed the fucker from the school book depository but no one believes it still.

[Throwdown]

This is just like the JFK assassination. There's concrete proof that oswald killed the fucker from the school book depository but no one believes it still.

for the first time in my life i agree with prefix

[Seeker]

There were two oswalds.

http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/2oswalds.htm

One was the real oswald and the other was a CIA double that the CIA used to frame the real Oswald.

The reason JFK was killed is because he was about to abolish the Federal Reserve system, which is owned by a private corporation.

Lincoln was killed for the exact same reason, and that's the reason there are so many coincidences between the JFK and the Lincoln assassination... the organization that killed both presidents wanted to leave their calling card.

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.
The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.
Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.
Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.
Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.
Both were shot in the head.
Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy.
Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln.
Both were assassinated by Southerners.
Both were succeeded by Southerners.
Both successors were named Johnson.
Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.
John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy was born in 1939.
Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names are comprised of fifteen letters
Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse.
Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.
Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

and the most important:

Both tried to abolish the Federal Reserve

Why did they try to abolish the Federal Reserve? It's all right here:

http://mindcontrolforums.com/fr5.htm
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm
http://www.rense.com/general29/ringring.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

[impala454]

lol "mindcontrolforums.com"

[Seeker]

lol "mindcontrolforums.com"

The Secrets of the Federal Reserve is a book by Eustace Mullins. Mindcontrolforums is kind enough to host an electronic copy of it. You can also find it on many other sites.

[JRockTTU]

There were two oswalds.

http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/2oswalds.htm

One was the real oswald and the other was a CIA double that the CIA used to frame the real Oswald.

The reason JFK was killed is because he was about to abolish the Federal Reserve system, which is owned by a private corporation.

Lincoln was killed for the exact same reason, and that's the reason there are so many coincidences between the JFK and the Lincoln assassination... the organization that killed both presidents wanted to leave their calling card.

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.
The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.
Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.
Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.
Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.
Both were shot in the head.
Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy.
Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln.
Both were assassinated by Southerners.
Both were succeeded by Southerners.
Both successors were named Johnson.
Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.
John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy was born in 1939.
Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names are comprised of fifteen letters
Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse.
Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.
Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

and the most important:

Both tried to abolish the Federal Reserve

Why did they try to abolish the Federal Reserve?  It's all right here:

http://mindcontrolforums.com/fr5.htm
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm
http://www.rense.com/general29/ringring.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

So this secret organization's "calling card" involves making sure when the presidents are born, elected to congress, elected president, how many letters are in their names, who succeeds them in office, who their secretaries are, etc before they ever even show an interest in abolishing the Federal Reserve?


These guys are good.

[Seeker]

So this secret organization's "calling card" involves making sure when the presidents are born, elected to congress, elected president, how many letters are in their names, who succeeds them in office, who their secretaries are, etc before they ever even show an interest in abolishing the Federal Reserve?


These guys are good.

Yep, they're the Illuminati.

THEY CONTROL EVERYTHING!!!!!

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

So this secret organization's "calling card" involves making sure when the presidents are born, elected to congress, elected president, how many letters are in their names, who succeeds them in office, who their secretaries are, etc before they ever even show an interest in abolishing the Federal Reserve?


These guys are good.

LOL dont forget oswald murdered a cop after the assassination and this isn't questioned at all... just fact (cept maybe before the assassination, but im pretty sure AFTER the assassination)

[Psykopath]

Hmmmmm, Illuminati are featured in Resident Evil 4.

/random

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

Hmmmmm, Illuminati are featured in Resident Evil 4.

/random

really?!? i just started playing that the other day lol

[Psykopath]

really?!? i just started playing that the other day lol

yeah, you'll start getting into that point of the story once you hit the Castle.

"Los Illuminatos" and "Illuminati" are both used, if I remember correctly. I need to play it again. I have ALL the bonus infinite weapons (I love the 'Chicago Typewriter'/tommygun!).

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

yeah, you'll start getting into that point of the story once you hit the Castle.

"Los Illuminatos" and "Illuminati" are both used, if I remember correctly. I need to play it again. I have ALL the bonus infinite weapons (I love the 'Chicago Typewriter'/tommygun!).

is it on xbox now? i was playing at a friends house, but i wanna play it on my own.

[Seeker]

i bet the game ends with the player finding out that the illuminati created the resident evil virus in order to depopulate the earth

[Spectatrix]

I need to finish reading the Illuminatus Trilogy... right after I finish reading A Garden of Pomegranates... right after I finish my thesis.


....


Fuck, I'm in for a long summer.

[Seeker]

I need to finish reading the Illuminatus Trilogy... right after I finish reading A Garden of Pomegranates... right after I finish my thesis.


....


Fuck, I'm in for a long summer.

outsource your thesis

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

outsource your thesis

the american way

[cmac]

no dramatic music in this one
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3858617066028236099

[Seeker]

no dramatic music in this one
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3858617066028236099

excellent video

[GhostofTHECHICKE...]

already addressed

[Spectatrix]

outsource your thesis

After the way today has gone with regard to my thesis work, this doesn't sound like such a bad idea...

I'm gonna have like 5 ulcers by the time I graduate... IN FUCKING DECEMBER.

[Psykopath]

i bet the game ends with the player finding out that the illuminati created the resident evil virus in order to depopulate the earth

well....not really that far off:


Las Plagas, ancient organisms, are dug up and can mutate living organisms. One man, Lord Sadler, is able to control the organisms and wants to control the world via their spread to all humanity.

Heh, the game even has a couple of references to the War on Terror in it.

[woody]

Yep, they're the Illuminati.

THEY CONTROL EVERYTHING!!!!!

then why do you blame bush & his cronies?

[Seeker]

cause they're in the illuminati, duh

[FORSAKENR320]

then why do you blame bush & his cronies?

it's like the dork hating the cool kids





COLUMBINE!

[pebkac]

http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm