For those of you left wondering about 9/11....

[Rage (SoCal)]

Exactly! The jet fuel burning for hours is what caused structural failure and the floors just pancaked on top of successive layers, cascading into total collapse. Today, we know how to prevent such failure and to stop such chain of event from demolishing the entire building.

But I digress. Plain fact is boring. Conspiracy crap is far more entertaining. Pontificating on a conspiracy is an orgy of mental masturbation that anyone can participate in.

The two towers weren't on fire for all that long, let alone hours.

 

[BioHazzard]

Here is an article published in the Civil Engineering department of The University of Sydney, Australia.

It explains what happened, and addressed some of the stuffs the conspiracy bluffs adhere to.

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml

Maybe we don't have to worry about Bush/Cheney intimidating the Aussies...

 

[BioHazzard]

The two towers weren't on fire for all that long, let alone hours.

My mistake. One fell in 45 minutes and the other in 90 minutes.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

But I digress. Plain fact is boring. Conspiracy crap is far more entertaining. Pontificating on a conspiracy is an orgy of mental masturbation that anyone can participate in.

...while selling T-Shirts.

 

[MaynardMeek]

The towers and ground zero were burning for days after they fell. You could still see the smoke and that was an issue for much of the rescue operations...

also.. someone said something about not a lot of steel being removed from the site.. that is not true at all.. we watched trucks that were running 24 hours a day 7 days a week clearing beams out of there

i was not there when it happened but i did go into the city on a number of occasions the few days after to do humanitarian work with my University i was at during said time...

 

[Iron Warrior]

Is it too hard to believe that the islamofacists who tried blowing up the WTC in the early 90's would want to do it again ? They also have a track record of commiting terrorist acts against Americans abroad, Iran hostage crisis ring the bell ? They also tried blowing LAX for Y2K but were stopped.

 

[jarhead]

Exactly! The jet fuel burning for hours is what caused structural failure and the floors just pancaked on top of successive layers, cascading into total collapse. Today, we know how to prevent such failure and to stop such chain of event from demolishing the entire building.

But I digress. Plain fact is boring. Conspiracy crap is far more entertaining. Pontificating on a conspiracy is an orgy of mental masturbation that anyone can participate in.

As a marine who served in the air wing, I can assure you jet fuel does not burn for hours. Why does everyone overlook this fact? Yes it started the fire, but it did not maintain it. After a very short time it was like any other fire in a skyscraper. Anyone who knows anything about jp5 aka jetfuel will tell you this. You guys can throw out all the wacko jokes you want and dismiss everything but this a damn fact.

 

[jarhead]

Is it too hard to believe that the islamofacists who tried blowing up the WTC in the early 90's would want to do it again ? They also have a track record of commiting terrorist acts against Americans abroad, Iran hostage crisis ring the bell ? They also tried blowing LAX for Y2K but were stopped.

Yeah, an incompetent pilot flew a 757 2 feet off the ground at almost 500 mph, skidded offf the turf while failing to damage the grass and slammed into the pentagon in a place that would have the least loss of life, while leaving behind the least amount of wreckage in aviatian history. Yeah that's believable.
Edit-Sorry,not trying to be too much of a smart ass, just stating the way I look at it. i just realized how heated this topic is getting!

 

[jarhead]

You can pick up a Tom Clancy fiction and highlight all the little nitty-gritty facts that are factually correct. But does not change his fiction into fact.

I am quite certain that Morgan Reynold is a wacko, by something he put in writing.

"...Meanwhile, the job of scientists, engineers and impartial researchers everywhere is to get the scientific and engineering analysis of 9/11 right, "though heaven should fall." Unfortunately, getting it right in today’s "security state" demands daring because explosives and structural experts have been intimidated in their analyses of the collapses of 9/11..."

Any sane person in the academic world knows there is absolutely no way in hell, that the US Government is even remotely capable of intimidating the whole academic community. Academic Freedom are not empy words. This wholesale conspiracy of intimidation, simply cannot be done in this country. To believe otherwise, would mean you are the kind of person who would believe in anything.

OK, may be in Communist Soviet, ''People's " Repulbic of China, North Korea and any other barbaric regimes, you have to toe the official line OR ELSE. But I have yet to hear the FBI or CIA shooting people's brain out in the basement of their secret HQ or any one being sent to psychiatric hospital for criticizing the US government.

This retired Professor from Texas A&M, went on record and wrote that people 'have been intimidated' that are afraid to get to the truth or speak the truth? Well, he has definitely gone over the deep end.

I have not checked yet. But my bet is, he is the laughing stock in the academic world. Texas A&M must be rather embarrassed by this fiasco of his.

You don't have to intimidate the academic community. You only need to throw out the term "conspiracy theory" and people automatically assume it's rubbish. The simple fact is, there was NO legitamate investigation into this disaster. Not even the site of the two towers was investigated as much as if it had been an accident. This is unacceptable. If the government had nothing to hide they did a damn good job of making it look like they did. BEST case scenario, they had DOCUMENTED warnings of such an attack and failed to act. Which for me is reason enough to question EVERYTHING.

 

[BioHazzard]

No investigation? Feel free to question all you want.

You can start by reading through all the investigation and research by engineers, not some wackos who are either working out of McDonald or write conspiracy crap full time.

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/WTC/structure.php

Knock yourself out!

Let me guess. 1. All those reports are fabricated by either 1. the Mossad, 2.the Illuminati, 3, US Government, 4, Talon invaders, 5, intimidated experts....

 

[jarhead]

No investigation? Feel free to question all you want.

You can start by reading through all the investigation and research by engineers, not some wackos who are either working out of McDonald or write conspiracy crap full time.

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/WTC/structure.php

Knock yourself out!

You have seen the 9/11 commision report right? The debris was hauled off without doing an investigation of the site worthy of merit. The "investigation" you linked is speculation after the fact. If I were to burn down my house they would at least do an investigation for insurance purposes. Even if the attacks happened as the "official" story states, they should have investigated and studied the site to at least learn from it and find out exactly how and why the towers collapsed, and to learn from it in an architectural sense.

 

[BioHazzard]

You don't have to intimidate the academic community. You only need to throw out the term "conspiracy theory" and people automatically assume it's rubbish. ..
.

It is rubbish, because it is based on two conspiracies that I pointed out, that simply cannot be done.

Until you can explain how such conspiracy is possible, you have nothing, I repeat, NOTHING to stand on.

 

[BioHazzard]

You have seen the 9/11 commision report right? The debris was hauled off without doing an investigation of the site worthy of merit. The "investigation" you linked is speculation.

Speculation huh? All of them? LOL How many have you actualy read? Do you know who those people are? To think that all the civil engineers in the whole world are wrong! And that a handful of conspiracy bluffs know actually what the truth is? WOW! It is certainly mindboggling. lol I need a drink.

Well, why don't you go tell those engineers then? LOL

Feel free to contact them. I am sure they would love to be enlightened by your insight.

You are wasting your effort on this bulletin board. lol If what you have to said has any value, hell, you can create one hell of an uproar in the civil engineer community. I guarantee you that they WILL absolutely love to hear from you. So Please do! Contact them! lol

 

[BioHazzard]

...Even if the attacks happened as the "official" story states, they should have investigated and studied the site to at least learn from it and find out exactly how and why the towers collapsed, and to learn from it in an architectural sense.

So, you didn't like the way they investigated, researched and analyzed the disaster? Are you an expert in engineering disaster analysis? Are you an expert in failure analysis?

What makes you correct and all the civil engineers in the world wrong? You are basically saying that they didn't do it right. So I want to know what makes you think you are right and they are wrong.

 

[jarhead]

It is rubbish, because it is based on two conspiracies that I pointed out, that simply cannot be done.

Until you can explain how such conspiracy is possible, you have nothing, I repeat, NOTHING to stand on.

Sure I have something to stand on. Buildings have never collapsed from fire, started by kerosene or not. Ever. Oh, that, and all the other stuff that's been mentioned that the only argument against given has been"oh that's crazy talk".
I do understand that we disagree though, and I fully respect your right to your opinion. As i said earlier, this topic gets under peoples skin easily.

 

[jarhead]

So, you didn't like the way they investigated, researched and analyzed the disaster? Are you an expert in engineering disaster analysis? Are you an expert in failure analysis?

What makes you correct and all the civil engineers in the world wrong? You are basically saying that they didn't do it right. So I want to know what makes you think you are right and they are wrong.

It's a simple as they weren't allowed to walk the site with the debris still there and do a proper investigation. Actually working the site is what I'm talking about. Not a group of of people analyzing it after the fact from a classroom.

 

[BioHazzard]

As a marine who served in the air wing, I can assure you jet fuel does not burn for hours. Why does everyone overlook this fact? Yes it started the fire, but it did not maintain it. After a very short time it was like any other fire in a skyscraper. Anyone who knows anything about jp5 aka jetfuel will tell you this. You guys can throw out all the wacko jokes you want and dismiss everything but this a damn fact.

Well, isn't it interesting that all the civil engineering experts didn't know something that is so commonly known to every guy who work with jet fuel? How do you suppose that is possible?

Like you said, it is common knowledge. Then do you think it is realistic to say that none of the world's experts knew?

 

[BioHazzard]

It's a simple as they weren't allowed to walk the site with the debris still there and do a proper investigation. Actually working the site is what I'm talking about. Not a group of of people analyzing it after the fact from a classroom.

Ohhh gee!! LOL I suggest you should go tell all the investigators, researchers and engineers in the world that they should do their disaster investigation according to you.

Isn't it interesting that the rest of the world got it all wrong and NOT ONE of them figured it out?

What is your qualification again?

 

[jarhead]

So, you didn't like the way they investigated, researched and analyzed the disaster? Are you an expert in engineering disaster analysis? Are you an expert in failure analysis?

What makes you correct and all the civil engineers in the world wrong? You are basically saying that they didn't do it right. So I want to know what makes you think you are right and they are wrong.

Never claimed to be an expert. But for example if there is a murder, cops will investigate the actual scene of the crime. This was not done, more than cursory observations. Even the government admits this and has been the subject of debate and grandstanding by our wonderful politicians. What I'm trying to say is that they did not prove there story of how and why the towers fell. AND as the link I posted shows, the lease holder from wtc7 admitted on camera that they pulled the building while the "official story is that it fell from damage, even though it was not hit.. If nothing else, please explain the last part if I am just completely crazy, and have no reason to question the official story.

 

[jarhead]

Ohhh gee!! LOL I suggest you should go tell all the investigators, researchers and engineers in the world that they should do their disaster investigation according to you.

Isn't it interesting that the rest of the world got it all wrong and NOT ONE of them figured it out?

What is your qualification again?

My qualification is an American citizen who expects his government to fully investigate such a disaster, and not piss on me and tell me it's raining. As for the rest- if you had turned on cspan during the time the 9/11 commision was released, you would have seen our own politicians and the victims families outraged by the lack of a proper investigation. It was all over tv. This is not just my opinion. Why can you not understand that?

 

[jarhead]

Well, isn't it interesting that all the civil engineering experts didn't know something that is so commonly known to every guy who work with jet fuel? How do you suppose that is possible?

Like you said, it is common knowledge. Then do you think it is realistic to say that none of the world's experts knew?

You know what, grab a chart of the elements, and some info about the fuel in question and do the math. If you take an honest look at it, with no emotions attached, it doesn't fit. I'll repeat it again- I worked for the government, hell I was even pro bush and for the war at one point. I did not just decide that I was going to start believing this stuff. And I don't believe all of it, just that there are questions. But I think we just disagree, which is cool.

 

[BioHazzard]

Sure I have something to stand on. Buildings have never collapsed from fire, started by kerosene or not. Ever. Oh, that, and all the other stuff that's been mentioned that the only argument against given has been"oh that's crazy talk".
I do understand that we disagree though, and I fully respect your right to your opinion. As i said earlier, this topic gets under peoples skin easily.

The Twin Towers didn't collapse from the fire! Sigh... Did you even bother to read any of those reports?

Actually the topic does not get under people's skin, because the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers is already known. We have already moved on. Lessons have been learnt and we know how to make building safer. So there is no breaking of new ground here.

What is irritating is that I am wasting time on the forum over nothing. lol

I am not trying to convince anyone to anything. The facts are already known. What someone chooses to believe in, affects that person only and has no consequence in the greater scheme of things. A person is free to believe in fantasy, conspiracy or even hallucination. That is fine. Only when he/she is in a position of decision/policy making, then reality comes rocking in. lol

You can say all you want on a bulletin board. But can you bring those to the table and actually present them to the civil engineers? That is what we call, 'where the rubber meets the road'.

When you cannot make it stick in real life, then you blame it on some mass conspiracy or intimidation? Well......

 

[jarhead]

The Twin Towers didn't collapse from the fire! Sigh... Did you even bother to read any of those reports?

Actually the topic does not get under people's skin, because the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers is already known. We have already moved on. Lessons have been learnt and we know how to make building safer. So there is no breaking of new ground here.

What is irritating is that I am wasting time on the forum over nothing. lol

I am not trying to convince anyone to anything. The facts are already known. What someone chooses to believe in, affects that person only and has no consequence in the greater scheme of things. A person is free to believe in fantasy, conspiracy or even hallucination. That is fine. Only when he/she is in a position of decision/policy making, then reality comes rocking in. lol

You can say all you want on a bulletin board. But can you bring those to the table and actually present them to the civil engineers? That is what we call, 'where the rubber meets the road'.

When you cannot make it stick in real life, then you blame it on some mass conspiracy or intimidation? Well......

Ok then show me the burning temperature and tendencies of the fuel, along with the tensile strngth of the steel, and the rate of speed of the "pancake collapse", along with another time in history a building collapsed from fire damage instead of just calling it all crazy. You have not addressed the few points that I have brought up in any other way than calling it crazy talk. And I'm still waiting for you to explain the guy ADMITTING the pulled the building.

But, I'm a moonbat anyway...

 

[BioHazzard]

You know what, grab a chart of the elements, and some info about the fuel in question and do the math. If you take an honest look at it, with no emotions attached, it doesn't fit. I'll repeat it again- I worked for the government, hell I was even pro bush and for the war at one point. I did not just decide that I was going to start believing this stuff. And I don't believe all of it, just that there are questions. But I think we just disagree, which is cool.

It is not about Bush, country, motherhood nor applepie. It isn't some anti GOP conspricy! I don't buy that for 1 second.

You and I can do all the math till kingdom come and it wouldn't solve anything, because we are not the experts in this field.

My question is, how is it possible that all the experts in the whole freaking world could have gotten it completely wrong, and missed some so incredibly obvious to all, fundamental clues, while some conspiracy bluffs (I don't mean you specifically) who have zero expertise in the area, alone, know the truth? Don't you think that is just silly?

 

[jarhead]

It is not about Bush, country, motherhood nor applepie. It isn't some anti GOP conspricy! I don't buy that for 1 second.

You and I can do all the math till kingdom come and it wouldn't solve anything, because we are not the experts in this field.

My question is, how is it possible that all the experts in the whole freaking world could have gotten it completely wrong, and missed some fundamental clues, while some conspiracy bluffs (I don't mean you specifically) who have zero expertise in the area, alone, know the truth? Don't you think that is just silly?

Ahhh you know what, we could go on forever. I do understand why you believe what you do, and it is easy to "prove" things on either side depending on how you look at it. And I do like hearing peoples thoughts who don't believe the same things I do because it give s me more to think about. I'm not trying to insult you or anyone for thinking that way, I just look at it differently. But I will say this- they DID fake the moon landing-joke:lol:

 

[BioHazzard]

Ok then show me the burning temperature and tendencies of the fuel, along with the tensile strngth of the steel, and the rate of speed of the "pancake collapse", along with another time in history a building collapsed from fire damage instead of just calling it all crazy. You have not addressed the few points that I have brought up in any other way than calling it crazy talk. And I'm still waiting for you to explain the guy ADMITTING the pulled the building.

But, I'm a moonbat anyway...

If you want the specifics, you would need to contact those who have done the research. From the links I provided, I am sure you can get contact info to quite a few guys.

About Silverstein 'admitting' the building was pulled? I'll tell you what, there is a huge financial reward waiting for you, if you can get that piece of clue to Swiss Re. They insured the buildings and had to cough out billions of dollars to Silverstein. They would be tickled to death if you have proof that Silverstein 'admitted' that the building was pulled.

The question is, how come Swiss Re didn't act on that 'admission'? Another conspiracy? How could they not know?

 

[jarhead]

If you want the specifics, you would need to contact those who have done the research. From the links I provided, I am sure you can get contact info to quite a few guys.

About Silverstein 'admitting' the building was pulled? I'll tell you what, there is a huge financial reward waiting for you, if you can get that piece of clue to Swiss Re. They insured the buildings and had to cough out billions of dollars to Silverstein. They would be tickled to death if you have proof that Silverstein 'admitted' that the building was pulled.

The question is, how come Swiss Re didn't act on that 'admission'? Another conspiracy? How could they not know?

If I could get a piece of that money, this debate would involve me being on a much better computer than what I'm on now.

 

[BioHazzard]

Ahhh you know what, we could go on forever. I do understand why you believe what you do, and it is easy to "prove" things on either side depending on how you look at it. And I do like hearing peoples thoughts who don't believe the same things I do because it give s me more to think about. I'm not trying to insult you or anyone for thinking that way, I just look at it differently. But I will say this- they DID fake the moon landing-joke:lol:

About the moon landing being fake thing, I got that solved for you too.

Well, if the moon landing was faked, the Soviets would have known, as they have all the instruments to monitor the lunar landing. And since it was the Cold War and Space Race, they would be tickled death to have the golden opportunity to humiliate the Americans by blowing the whistle. Therefore, the lunar landing could NOT have been faked.

 

[jarhead]

About the moon landing being fake thing, I got that solved for you too.

Well, if the moon landing was faked, the Soviets would have known, as they have all the instruments to monitor the lunar landing. And since it was the Cold War and Space Race, they would be tickled death to have the golden opportunity to humiliate the Americans by blowing the whistle. Therefore, the lunar landing could NOT have been faked.

Damn you've really thought that one out. Best debunking I've heard yet.:lol:

 

[BioHazzard]

My qualification is an American citizen who expects his government to fully investigate such a disaster, and not piss on me and tell me it's raining. As for the rest- if you had turned on cspan during the time the 9/11 commision was released, you would have seen our own politicians and the victims families outraged by the lack of a proper investigation. It was all over tv. This is not just my opinion. Why can you not understand that?

Everybody is an expert on how things should be done, when they have zero expertise in how to go about doing it. Talk is cheap when you are not responsible for getting it right.

Everybody knows how to run the government, fight a war, better than the people actually doing it. That is the way it has been ever since public opinion is allowed.

That does not mean anything.

I would pay attention IF the civil engineers and failure analysis expert raise objections and questions.

If the people who know, do not object while those who don't know are complaining, that means sh1t to me. (I am not referring to you specifically)

P.S. The 'qualification' you cited, is NOT actually a qualification, but rather your right as an American citizen to know. Just because you have a right to be informed of this nation's affairs, does not make you an expert in civil engineering and disaster investigation. I don't mean that in any disrespectful way.

 

[BioHazzard]

Damn you've really thought that one out. Best debunking I've heard yet.:lol:

See, the key is to know where the smoking gun is. Once you get the smoking gun, the rest can be ignored. lol

 

[BioHazzard]

Everybody is an expert on how things should be done, when they have zero expertise in how to go about doing it. Talk is cheap when you are not responsible for getting it right.

Everybody knows how to run the government, fight a war, better than the people actually doing it. That is the way it has been ever since public opinion is allowed.

That does not mean anything.

I would pay attention IF the civil engineers and failure analysis expert raise objections and questions.

If the people who know, do not object while those who don't know are complaining, that means sh1t to me.

P.S. The 'qualification' you cited, is NOT actually a qualification, but rather your right as an American citizen to know. Just because you have a right to be informed of this nation's affairs, does not make you an expert in civil engineering and disaster investigation. I don't mean that in any disrespectful way.

See, if I want to know about jet fuel or issues related to the Marines, I would listen to you and NOT Rumsfeld or Bush.

 

[jarhead]

Coincidentally, there is an interesting show about the construction, fall, and clean up of the towers on the history channel right now(if you're on the east coast).

Oh God, I just realized I'm watching the history channel on a saturday night.

 

[BioHazzard]

Coincidentally, there is an interesting show about the construction, fall, and clean up of the towers on the history channel right now(if you're on the east coast).

Oh God, I just realized I'm watching the history channel on a saturday night.

Hell, that is why I got agitated. It is Saturday night and I am arguing on the internet! Sheeze! :wtf:

But it is all good. As a citizen of a democracy, it is our duty and responsiblity to ask questions and demand accountability of our government.

Since my Saturday evening is ****ed, I might as well watched the documentary when it comes up later at 1am. lol

I saw part of another show about the rebuilding effort, last night. Someone suggested that we should rebuild the Twin Towers back exactly the same way it was, so as to send the message, "**** YOU! Back to business as before! We are Americans and we will keep on doing whatever hell that we damn well please!"

 

[BioHazzard]

Btw, Jarhead, when I was referring to people who complain but do not know have expertise on the subject matter, or when I mention conspiracy bluffs, I was not referring to you specifically.

 

[jarhead]

Hell, that is why I got agitated. It is Saturday night and I am arguing on the internet! Sheeze! :wtf:

But it is all good. As a citizen of a democracy, it is our duty and responsiblity to ask questions and demand accountability of our government.

Since my Saturday evening is ****ed, I might as well watched the documentary when it comes up later at 1am. lol

I saw part of another show about the rebuilding effort, last night. Someone suggested that we should rebuild the Twin Towers back exactly the same way it was, so as to send the message, "**** YOU! Back to business as before! We are Americans and we will keep on doing whatever hell that we damn well please!"

That was Penn and Tellers show called Bull****. It's a great show, and that episode was pretty sweet. It focuses on the plans for rebuilding and the politics behind it. It's a shame what they have done with the site so far(which is nothing) and the local businesses are suffering.

 

[Iron Warrior]

Yeah, an incompetent pilot flew a 757 2 feet off the ground at almost 500 mph, skidded offf the turf while failing to damage the grass and slammed into the pentagon in a place that would have the least loss of life, while leaving behind the least amount of wreckage in aviatian history. Yeah that's believable.
Edit-Sorry,not trying to be too much of a smart ass, just stating the way I look at it. i just realized how heated this topic is getting!

No worries, this is just the internet I'm sure most of would get along in the real world

 

[MaynardMeek]

Jarhead.. just an FYI all the comments/questions you have brought up to make your points were actually answered.. please review the nova link in either page 3, 4 or something... it talks all about the temp etc etc...

 

[Grunt76]

How can you write everything off as being made up? And the link I posted assigns no blame, but takes an analytical approach to the theory of why the towers fell the way they did, and raises legitimate questions. It is not ALL paranoia or whacko theories. The insider trading is hard evidence that something doesn't add up, as is the lease holder of wtc-7 ON VIDEO admitting that they pulled the building. This could go on and on but these are just a couple of examples that in my opinion warrant some answering to. Are there some crazies out there with some crazy theories? Sure. But there are also sane people out there raising some legitimate concerns. Sure the first video posted is a compilation of alot of things that suit the idea he's trying to convey. Some factual and can be found on paper, and some that are conjecture. But there is just too much there to ignore or write off as coincidence. What piques my personal interest are the things that can be questioned with some logic or science behind it to back it up. The other stuff i just write off. And again, I'm not in a position to assign blame, but mass murder is nothing new to our government.
here is a link with a newsclip of the leaseholder admitting to pull the building.http://www.angelfire.com/hero2/therepublic/
it was the first link I found-I didn't read the rest of the page. Is this also a complete fabrication made up by guys living in their basement hating the government?

Funny how bashers of those who see a problem with the 9/11 situation never answer specific, logical, simple questions such as these huh? They avoid them, then get all emotional and finally BASH. Considering the lack of a true ability to think logically on the part of a LOT of people on this issue, it is no surprise that governments get away with SO MUCH.

 

[MaynardMeek]

I happen to think that given the situation.. it was a very smart move to take down the building under a true controlled form inorder to prevent fires from spreading through out other areas of the city. Its just like with brush/land fires.. sometimes you have to burn more land yourself inorder to save an even greater amount....

and give the amount of time that building was standing and empty... one is able to bring in charges and what not to take the building down...but this one building being taken down by the choice of the fire department and the owner does not a conspiracy make...

as for the other videos.. more so of the CNN ( i think it was) reporter saying that no plane hit the pentagon... he is a reporter.. he had no ability to say anything of that nature, he is suppose to be there and say.. Something happened.. we don't know what.. but there is a big hole and chunk out of the pentagon.. we will get back to you when there is more to tell.. but for now.. look at the hole.

And if you don't think it was a plane then the families of the of the 800 dead people inside said plane have some explaining to do

 

[PastorofMuppets]

As a marine who served in the air wing, I can assure you jet fuel does not burn for hours.

It probably has something to do with the fact that other things like furniture, paper, carpeting, and other combustibles also can catch on fire and burn, and burn quite hot.

And of course since there was a metric ass load of said combustibles, it would make decent sense that they would burn on and off for quite some time.

 

[BioHazzard]

I happen to think that given the situation.. it was a very smart move to take down the building under a true controlled form inorder to prevent fires from spreading through out other areas of the city. Its just like with brush/land fires.. sometimes you have to burn more land yourself inorder to save an even greater amount....

and give the amount of time that building was standing and empty... one is able to bring in charges and what not to take the building down...but this one building being taken down by the choice of the fire department and the owner does not a conspiracy make...

Impossible to carry out a controlled demolition in a hurry. Do some research in how controlled demo is executed, and you would agree that it can't be done in such a short notice.

as for the other videos.. more so of the CNN ( i think it was) reporter saying that no plane hit the pentagon... he is a reporter.. he had no ability to say anything of that nature, he is suppose to be there and say.. Something happened.. we don't know what.. but there is a big hole and chunk out of the pentagon.. we will get back to you when there is more to tell.. but for now.. look at the hole.

As I recall, it was a CNN reporter according to that conspiracy site. I had to laugh at that too. What the hell does a reporter know about disaster investigation? Every body laughed when a reporter wrote about designer steroid. But when it comes to conspiracy, a reporter is whom you need to trust.

And if you don't think it was a plane then the families of the of the 800 dead people inside said plane have some explaining to do

Yep, another mass conspiracy ! Holy smoke! The whole world is either under intimidation or in on this conspiracy.

 

[BioHazzard]

Funny how bashers of those who see a problem with the 9/11 situation never answer specific, logical, simple questions such as these huh? They avoid them, then get all emotional and finally BASH. Considering the lack of a true ability to think logically on the part of a LOT of people on this issue, it is no surprise that governments get away with SO MUCH.

Because it is a waste of time and effort to wade through the product of conspiracy bluff's imagination.

The fact that none of the civil engineers in the whole wide world, has given any credence to such insinuation, means they are just that, insinuation.

Just because no one wants to waste time on chewing on a fantasy, does not change the fact that the fantasy is just a fantasy.

There are lots of civil engineering insitutes in the US alone. Feel free to take it up with them. I am sure they are more than happy to look into it, IF what you bring to the table has any merit.

The fact that none of the world's civil engineers in any of the engineering schools and firms, has give one shred of credibility to these nonsensical insinuation, means we should not be wasting our time and effort on them neither.


If you think your questions are ' specific, logical, simple' based on your 'true ability to think logically', hell, then, I am sure you would have no problem in lining up an audience with all the civil engineers and disaster investigators. I suggest you contact them immediately. We are eagerly awaiting what they think about your insight.

 

[MaynardMeek]

On September 9, 2005, Mr. Dara McQuillan, a spokesman for Silverstein Properties, issued the following statement on this issue:

Seven World Trade Center collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours. There were no casualties, thanks to the heroism of the Fire Department and the work of Silverstein Properties employees who evacuated tenants from the building.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conducted a thorough investigation of the collapse of all the World Trade Center buildings. The FEMA report concluded that the collapse of Seven World Trade Center was a direct result of fires triggered by debris from the collapse of WTC Tower 1.
In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.
Later in the day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20 p.m. the building collapsed. No lives were lost at Seven World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
​

As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, “I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it.” Mr. McQuillan has stated that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology has stated unequivocally, “NIST has seen so evidence that the collapse of WTC 7 was caused by bombs, missiles, or controlled demolition,” in its Collapse of WTC 7 report (p. 6). NIST’s working hypothesis for the collapse of WTC 7 is that it was caused by the collapse of a critical column due to “fire and/or debris induced structural damage.” There was substantial damage to WTC 7 when the nearby WTC 1 tower collapsed and fires began shortly afterwards. Also, WTC 7 was a very unusual building because it was built over an existing Con-Edison power generation substation, which contained two large 6,000 gallon fuel tanks for the emergency generation of power. The fuel from these tanks could have contributed to the intense heat that apparently weakened the supporting columns in WTC 7




taken from the 9-11 report

 

[knox]

After reading all the way through this everyone forgot to take into account that in Osama's letter he stated he had nothing to do with the attacks...so......yea.....end of debate

 

[MaynardMeek]

i don't think anyone really posted anything about osama here... we are just talking about how the buildings fell.. not really who ordered it just yet... that is for another thread lol but.. if we are starting it.. george bush's adopted brother, bill clinton was the one who caused all of this..

 

[BioHazzard]

..... ... As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, “I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it.” Mr. McQuillan has stated that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.....

and the Conpiracy crowd distorted that into demolishing the building... LOL

I knew it is crap because if that insinuation had any merit at all, Swiss Re would have seized on that to save billions of dollars. lol

 

[jarhead]

and the Conpiracy crowd distorted that into demolishing the building... LOL

I knew it is crap because if that insinuation had any merit at all, Swiss Re would have seized on that to save billions of dollars. lol

Actually if you listen to the clip he states that they had already evacuated the building prior to saying they decided to "pull it". He's saying the firefighters said due to the damage, they couldn't save "it" so they recommended pulling "it". At least concede it's an odd choice of words to use use "it" instead of "them" if he was indeed talking about pulling people from the building. And he had already been awarded the claim prior to the collapse of the building. So the actual collapse had no bearing on the money awarded.

 

[BioHazzard]

Actually if you listen to the clip he states that they had already evacuated the building prior to saying they decided to "pull it". And he had already been awarded the claim prior to the collapse of the building. So the actual collapse had no bearing on the money awarded.

That is not how insurance claims work. You don't get paid if you 'pull' your own building down.

Besides, he DIDN"T get awarded on the spot.

Again, if you think Swiss Re just handed over billions of dollars in claim without combing over the whole thing with a fine comb, then you must think they are complete morons. In fact, Silverstein fought Swiss Re in court for a long time, before he got paid. Also, Swiss Re hired their own failure analysis firm to conduct their investigation into the disaster.


P.S. There is no chance in hell that you can carry out a controlled demolition in such short order. A simple check on how controlled demolition is done will reveal that.

 

[jarhead]

That is not how insurance claims work. You don't get paid if you 'pull' your own building down.

Besides, he DIDN"T get awarded on the spot.

Yes he did, feel free to look it up. The building had already been burning for hours prior to the collapse, and deemed a loss.

Edit- this isn't completely accurate- the initial claim due to the fact the building was damaged in a terrorist act(which was a clause in the policy) was 831 mil, which was known prior to the fall. He later settled for a lesser amount. The greedy bastard then went on to try and get a double claim because two planes hit the towers, so he's saying it was two attacks. (the insurance company is fighting this). This debate aside, that takes balls the size of....well pretty damn big balls.