Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know who did what, when, or even how. I just know it looks funny.
~T
Maybe the fact that republicans won't give any thought to the "conspiracy" possiblity says something. Bill O'really is on right now and is pretty much saying that anyone who believes in this "conspiracy" is an America hater. And as far as a conspiracy theory, it takes a good business man to believe in a conspiracy.
Originally Posted by YapCity
"Considered that too, but all buildings, straight down? No matter what, the integrity of one side would have to give before the other. It just doesn't jive, not more than once like that."
"I'm sorry, it reeks. I'm not going to even think about accusations because it's far fetched, and there is no concrete evidence, but it still reeks."
~T
"I dont think anyone knows 100% what a building like this would do under these circumstances. Unless someone had tested a building of this size by running a jet full of fuel into it. Have they? Nothing is certain, we may think we know how something will happen and it usually goes the other. My friends said they couldnt see through the mess to see which way they were falling."
Answer to the heat question:
Back in 1945 a B25 Bomber did hit the Empier State Building and the fire department went up to the floor where the plane hit, and put the fire out. It burned longer than the WTC without the building falling down because it was reinforced steel, just like the WTC. To melt steel you need 2850 degree hot fire for a long time, and jet fuel just dosen't burn anywhere nearly that hot. That is why the firemen and the police felt safe enough to go up into the WTC because they knew that no building with steele reinforced guts had ever fallen due to fire before, so they went in to help the people get out, never expecting there to be "Other Explosions" to be going off. You can acutally SEE the effects of the explosions as the building falls because it shot out the building parts the full width of the building and that took a lot of energy to do. The steel was cut in just the right length to fit on the trucks that hauled it away to make sure that no experts could get their hands on the "evidence." All of it was hauled wasy quickly so that nobody could check it for cut marks, but you can actually SEE the cut lines in some of the photos. Also the "Plane" that hit the pentagon didn't break any of the windows as wide as the wings were, the hole was only 18 feet in diamater, and no seats or landing gear is seen in the photos. Someone said that governments offten create attacks too justify going to war, like the Gulf of Tonkin incident that never happened, it was all made up by LBJ.
And it worked for LBJ. We got into Vietnam and lost 58,000 good people all for nothing but LBJ's friends in the war business. I don't like these facts anymore than anybody else, but I have to admit that they are facts.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by skipbaker
Back in 1945 a B25 Bomber did hit the Empier State Building and the fire department went up to the floor where the plane hit, and put the fire out. It burned longer than the WTC without the building falling down because it was reinforced steel, just like the WTC. To melt steel you need 2850 degree hot fire for a long time, and jet fuel just dosen't burn anywhere nearly that hot. That is why the firemen and the police felt safe enough to go up into the WTC because they knew that no building with steele reinforced guts had ever fallen due to fire before, so they went in to help the people get out, never expecting there to be "Other Explosions" to be going off. You can acutally SEE the effects of the explosions as the building falls because it shot out the building parts the full width of the building and that took a lot of energy to do. The steel was cut in just the right length to fit on the trucks that hauled it away to make sure that no experts could get their hands on the "evidence." All of it was hauled wasy quickly so that nobody could check it for cut marks, but you can actually SEE the cut lines in some of the photos. Also the "Plane" that hit the pentagon didn't break any of the windows as wide as the wings were, the hole was only 18 feet in diamater, and no seats or landing gear is seen in the photos. Someone said that governments offten create attacks too justify going to war, like the Gulf of Tonkin incident that never happened, it was all made up by LBJ.
And it worked for LBJ. We got into Vietnam and lost 58,000 good people all for nothing but LBJ's friends in the war business. I don't like these facts anymore than anybody else, but I have to admit that they are facts.
If you're gonna bring up the B-25 you should realize it probably weighed well under 45.000 lbs fully loaded and carred little fuel at around 200mph vs. the airliners at several HUNDRED thousand pounds with several thiusand gallons of fuel at 400-500mph. If you read a physics book I believe you'll also find the force produced is mass times the acceleration, there is simply no comparison between the loads involved. The B-25 caused little structural damage compared to the airliners and had comparably a very small amount of fuel on board.
Last edited by burdell; 04-02-2007 at 07:33 PM..
Reason: Addition
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe the Bush Administration could pull off something so elaborate and secrative. The 911 conspiracies give these idiots an appearance of genius. And we all know this is not the case.
Remember, these are the same baffoons that are still trying to win an unwinnable war. The same morons who completely failed to manage the first large-scale emergency since 9/11 (Katrina), and countless other bumblings.
We may not know all the facts, but I don't think The Chimp authorized or conspired the 911 attacks.
I'm sorry, but I find it hard to believe the Bush Administration could pull off something so elaborate and secrative. The 911 conspiracies give these idiots an appearance of genius. And we all know this is not the case.
Remember, these are the same baffoons that are still trying to win an unwinnable war. The same morons who completely failed to manage the first large-scale emergency since 9/11 (Katrina), and countless other bumblings.
We may not know all the facts, but I don't think The Chimp authorized or conspired the 911 attacks.
I don't want to believe it either, lol.
However, think about it. How can someone seemingly THAT STUPID end up in office twice? lol.
I guess I have a trust issue. I'm not convinced either way, but all I know is I can't do anything about it.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by YapCity
As for falling straight down, no, that's not the case. If the building was elevated 100 feet in the air, then dropped, yes, it would go straight down.
That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a structure. A structure with components that COULD NOT POSSIBLY share the exact same structural integrity, especially since it was compromised like that. It would have to be ever so slightly stronger/weaker in one area than the other. This would cause the building to tilt on the way down. We didn't even get that, not even a small tilt. It went STRAIGHT down, BOTH times.
"Assume the worst", maybe that was Dick Cheney's conscience talking?
~T
They were hit at different angles at no doubt different speeds by different airplanes carrying different fuel loads that would disperse throughout the buildings differently yet they fell the SAME way, NOT DIFFERENTLY.
They were hit at different angles at no doubt different speeds by different airplanes carrying different fuel loads that would disperse throughout the buildings differently yet they fell the SAME way, NOT DIFFERENTLY.
WHAT did they share? DESIGN!
Agreed, yes, SAME DESIGN, both compromised differently.
Because of that fact, they should have behaved differently on the way down.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by YapCity
Agreed, yes, SAME DESIGN, both compromised differently.
Because of that fact, they should have behaved differently on the way down.
~T
I have to take the opposite view, that their failure mode was influenced more by design than any other factor, that's why they failed in the same manner.
A planned implosion is a complicated job requiring many strategically placed charges. It's just too hard to believe that could have been done and hidden from what, 40+ thousand people working in the 2 buildings? And IF that was accomplished it would have been necessary for all the detonators to function perfectly after the two random impacts. I'd say the overall odds would rival those of a meteor impact
I have to take the opposite view, that their failure mode was influenced more by design than any other factor, that's why they failed in the same manner.
A planned implosion is a complicated job requiring many strategically placed charges. It's just too hard to believe that could have been done and hidden from what, 40+ thousand people working in the 2 buildings? And IF that was accomplished it would have been necessary for all the detonators to function perfectly after the two random impacts. I'd say the overall odds would rival those of a meteor impact
All I know is this....
1. I firmly believe at least one of the buildings should have tipped over a bit on the way down.
2. I watched several videos. I can SEE the smaller "cut charges" going off at the bottom when the buildings are coming down. Is it steel/concrete buckling, or explosives? I don't know.
3. I know that there was an unscheduled shutdown of the security systems in the towers the weekend before 9/11
4. I know that the security company has a blood relation to of all people, BUSH.
I had NO idea what happened, but I'll never stop saying that the whole thing just reeks.
.....you'll also hear plenty of eye-witness accounts of a missile hitting the pentagon. Odd that it (or the plane)hit a wing that was supposed to be vacant, huh?
Anybody wonder why all the video from the cameras belonging to local businesses whos cameras were pointing partially at the pentagon were confiscated by the NSA?
Routine investigation?
It reeks, that's all I'm willing to say about it. No proof, none at all, but it reeks.
~T
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
