Mandarin Oriental Hotel fire VERSUS 911/WTC "fire" (legal, Christmas, Clinton)
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.
Karfar, more or less yes that's what I'm saying. 9/11 was a complete fraud on the American people. The three (not 2) towers were brought down by thoroughly planned and executed controlled demolitions.
I've talked to someone who believed that the plane over Pennsylvania was shot down by our military, but I've never heard someone speculate that there were bombs in the towers. I'm just curious, if you do believe that, what do you think the reasoning behind it was?
I somehow suspect an airplane coming through at 450mph might take out several supports as well. while the building was designed to take an airplane hit it was a smaller plane imagined and didnt have 6000# of fuel. my only issue with th e theory of the fall of the towers comes with it seemed to start from the top. It didnt seem like the floors hit by the plane wen first.. We may never know.
I think the biggest conspiracy comes from the administration ignoring the warnings and doing nothing to safeguard the public. They certainly had their inner circle on private aircraft.... that should make everyone go hmmmmm
Karfar, your meaning is not perfectly clear. I do believe it's likely the Pennsylvania plane was shot down by the military. Former Secretary of Defense Donald "I stand at my desk all day so therefore Medieval-style torture is good stuff" Rumsfeld slipped up in a press conference and admitted that the plane was shot down. (I have the source/reference for that if anyone is interested.)
As for the reasoning behind the 9/11 fraud, I believe the people who carried it out thought that while what they were doing was heinously criminal and that innocent Americans (yup their own fellow citizens!) would die, it had to be done for the greater good of the future of American civilization. In fact this has happened many times in American history, for example, Nixon-Kissinger's bombing and invasion of Cambodia followed a similar twisted psychopathic logic.
Without 9/11, the USA could not invade and acquire the country of Iraq (2nd highest petroleum reserves in the world) and "protect" America from future harm by pre-emptively turning it into a de facto police state or "surveillance state".
These people view a democratic, free society as "quaint" and outmoded. They like democracy and freedom but genuinely believe(d) the USA wouldn't survive the coming decades unless the government really ratcheted-up it's potential power and control over the American people.
Karfar, your meaning is not perfectly clear. I do believe it's likely the Pennsylvania plane was shot down by the military. Former Secretary of Defense Donald "I stand at my desk all day so therefore Medieval-style torture is good stuff" Rumsfeld slipped up in a press conference and admitted that the plane was shot down. (I have the source/reference for that if anyone is interested.)
As for the reasoning behind the 9/11 fraud, I believe the people who carried it out thought that while what they were doing was heinously criminal and that innocent Americans (yup their own fellow citizens!) would die, it had to be done for the greater good of the future of American civilization. In fact this has happened many times in American history, for example, Nixon-Kissinger's bombing and invasion of Cambodia followed a similar twisted psychopathic logic.
Without 9/11, the USA could not invade and acquire the country of Iraq (2nd highest petroleum reserves in the world) and "protect" America from future harm by pre-emptively turning it into a de facto police state or "surveillance state".
These people view a democratic, free society as "quaint" and outmoded. They like democracy and freedom but genuinely believe(d) the USA wouldn't survive the coming decades unless the government really ratcheted-up it's potential power and control over the American people.
I'd be interested in seeing the video or whatever you have of Rumsfield saying that please.
1. Was the design load of the Chinese tower greater or less than the WTC?
2. How much additional load stress does a 757 add to the equation? A fully loaded 757 weighs 250,000 pounds.
3. What factor did the burning interior furnishings, carpet, etc have on the temperature of the fire?
4. Do explosives liquify steel or cause it to just bend?
5. Was the Chinese tower constructed to withstand seismic activity? Was the WTC?
6. Would the WTC meet the building code of today?
7. How hot does jet fuel burn?
I think fundamentally my problem with the 9/11 conspiracy is that it assumes the govt. is smart enough to pull it off without a single person stepping forward with credible evidence to that affect.
I'm not an expert but I'm pretty sure that none of the WTC towers had "massive amounts of airplane fuel" stored in them. The jet fuel came from the planes, and was a relatively tiny amount relative to the size of the towers. Also, WTC7 was not hit by a plane or jet fuel.
My understanding is jet fuel burns at a low temperature and can not melt or pulverize steel.
Also, the Mandarin Oriental Hotel was burned much, much (MUCH) more severely and completely than the WTC towers and it did not collapse in the least bit. Not even a single floor collapsed! As stated earlier, neither did the Mandarin Hotel pulverize itself into crumbly white powder and collapse perfectly into its own footprint in less than 10 seconds.
Okay, I am now waiting for the next Great Brain of CD-F to step up to the plate.... (hah hah)
You ever seen how a blow torch works? It requires either an open intake on the torch tip for natural flow or pressurized oxygen as an accelerant which increases the temp of the flame. Being they were tall towers they had plenty of pressurized oxygen (wind) to fuel the torch effect. The planes were fully filled for cross country flights. Once the buildings where on fire and two sides of the buildings where open that allowed strong winds and atomized airplane fuel to pass through which enraged the flames, it was over.
"The heat of the jet fuel burning in the WTC softened the steel above it until it lost strength, then the weight of the upper floors caused it to pancake down on itself." - Problem with that statement is that burning jet fuel will not melt steel, not even close. Look it up for yourself. Also, this argument does not explain what happened to building 7 aka WTC7.
You're losing, in translation, the idea that burning fuel in the open air acts completely different then in an enclosed area with opening that allow for higher velocity of fresh air. Have you ever used an oxygen and acetylene torch? Without oxygen it's a flame like you would see with a candle. Once you add the accelrant (oxygen) the flame tightens up and also changes colors. Depending on the metal you are cutting, welding or soldering... etc determines what fuel, if you need an inert gas, what tip on the torch..etc.
Last edited by BigJon3475; 04-03-2009 at 12:20 AM..
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.
