[metropropuskruww]

The History and Discovery channels have done some excellent shows on the whys and wherefores of the events on 9/11. They've also done shows on controlled demolitions. If you've seen both, it's painfully obvious how naive one has to be to even begin to entertain the idea that the buildings were brought down in a controlled demolition.

[tattcasetle]

And how many people would have to have kept the secret if there were bombs planted for a covert controlled demolitian?

Obviously the Bush admin is not very good at keeping covert, unclassified things secret...

[Seisyvose]

Here's an absolutely great video showing all the evidence that no one here heckling can refute.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ge+2nd+edition

I suggest you download the google video viewer if you don't already have it so you can download the show with better video quality.

It is impossible for the WTC towers to burn to a crumble. It is complete falsehood and its a joke to those that know science. The entire video makes a great case and no one here is going to be able to refute it.

[wonceinee]

An apt description if ever I saw one.

Matt

AH!!! now that wasn't what I meant. (where was your smiley????) (and quite honestly, the Jury is out on this whether or not that is in line with your thinking, (but obviously not)
but none the less, a "Cute" response.

[gusecrync]

The History and Discovery channels have done some excellent shows on the whys and wherefores of the events on 9/11. They've also done shows on controlled demolitions. If you've seen both, it's painfully obvious how naive one has to be to even begin to entertain the idea that the buildings were brought down in a controlled demolition.

Myop=vs=Yurop

[Sertvfdnhgjk]

Matt! I don't think anyone else on this site makes me laugh as many times as you. Well done!

And about the bombs...maybe the hijackers had bombs on the planes? Remember 93, the one that crashed into the ground in Pennsylvania. The one that my friend's best friend was on.


Mark Bingham

These were the guys that said let's roll and ambushed the fuckers. These are our American heros.

Not on the planes Sam. It was demolition.

Even a big bomb on the plane wouldn't cause the collapse of the towers.

In order to bring down a building in freefall speed, you would need explosive devices to bring down the core of the structure in the WTC buildings to make it so.

There has been a substantial amount of reports of what seems like high explosives going off at the base of the buildings inside. The planes that hit the buildings can't create this.

There is no way possible that the WTC towers were 'burned' to the ground. That is impossible.

[Haremporblape]

QUOTE
1. Explosions occuring on sides of building, far below where levels are collapsing and before there began to be a collaps, in video footage.
2. The presence of large quantities of molten steel in the debris, when burning jet fuel cannot melt steel.
3. Never has a building collapsed into its own footprint except thru controlled demolition. Buildings which collapse in earthquakes have fallen to the side.
4. Dip in the top of WTC 7 when it collapsed characteristic of controlled demolition.
5. Buildings fell at nearly the same rate as free-fall, which would be impossible unless supporting structure underneath had first been demolished.
6. Never before has a steel frame building collapsed solely due to fire, as WTC 7 did, and the other two apparently as well since the plane collisions themselves did not appear to cause collapse.

Controlled deomlition better fits the available observations of the fall. Viewing the video footage, the way the WTC towers fell certainly looks exactly like footage from controlled demolitions of large buildings.
QUOTE END



SIMPEL EXPLANATION

WTC 1 and 2 both had thick steel barriers up to about the 80 th. floor. From there and up the steel barriers were under half as thick. Both the planes flew in just above the 80 th. floor and crushed many of the those thin steel barriers. That means about 30 floors only supported by to few thin steel barriers. This combined with the extreme heat from the planefire might not have melted the rest of the thin steel barriers but certanly weakened them. Only outcoming result: Reverse domino effect. Go figure!

MAY THIS POST END THIS GEEKY THREAD!

[Logaleta]

In a controlled demolition the crews go in and cut and weaken the steel supports and install charges so they will collapse. This takes weeks for a lot smaller building, and requires the removal of the interior walls. How come none of the occupants of the building ever asked about the posts being cut up and explosives and wires running all over the place?

The WTC was unique in that the exterior posts supported most of the weight, giving a very open interior. When two giant, airliner-sized sections of the exterior walls, which were the supports, are rendered non-existent, it's pretty certain that the building will collapse. All you need to do is believe in gravity.

I also will now leave the tinfoil-hat crowd to hide under their beds and shake at all the devious, clandestine, super-secret conspiracies that Bushco has come up with. I will just sit in the open and marvel at how efficiently they have kept a secret of this magnitude, involving so many people.

[casinochniks]

Not on the planes Sam. It was demolition.

Even a big bomb on the plane wouldn't cause the collapse of the towers.

In order to bring down a building in freefall speed, you would need explosive devices to bring down the core of the structure in the WTC buildings to make it so.

There has been a substantial amount of reports of what seems like high explosives going off at the base of the buildings inside. The planes that hit the buildings can't create this.

There is no way possible that the WTC towers were 'burned' to the ground. That is impossible.

What a bunch of bullshit.

You and beandog and ffoobar should form a club.

Matt

[styhorporry]

You and beandog and ffoobar should form a club.

Is there enough tinfoil???

[sanddrareyk]

I am out of here. These 9/11 conspiracy theories are utter bullshit.

I'll go spend my time on something more credible and interesting, like Elvis sightings.

Matt

[highattainlet]

I will just sit in the open and marvel at how efficiently they have kept a secret of this magnitude, involving so many people.

Me too Spadplanter. Bush Inc could not have pulled it off!

I would like to see a handshake emoticon

[Lhiistyssdds]

I am out of here. These 9/11 conspiracy theories are utter bullshit.

I'll go spend my time on something more credible and interesting, like Elvis sightings.

Matt

I'll wager that Elvis was killed in the controlled demolition of the WTC buildings.

Man, we seriously need a paranoid emoticon!

[jhfsdhf]

I am out of here. These 9/11 conspiracy theories are utter bullshit.

I'll go spend my time on something more credible and interesting, like Elvis sightings.

Matt

BYE, fur now

[Clilmence]

In a controlled demolition the crews go in and cut and weaken the steel supports and install charges so they will collapse. This takes weeks for a lot smaller building, and requires the removal of the interior walls. How come none of the occupants of the building ever asked about the posts being cut up and explosives and wires running all over the place?

You're demanding a scenario that needs not be there for the event to take place. You don't need to remove interior walls to place explosive charges, especially when the core of the structure in situated next to the elevator shaft.

The video shows how they would have done it.

The WTC was unique in that the exterior posts supported most of the weight, giving a very open interior. When two giant, airliner-sized sections of the exterior walls, which were the supports, are rendered non-existent, it's pretty certain that the building will collapse. All you need to do is believe in gravity. Everyone believes in gravity. Funny how building that were built tough to withstand just about anything crumbled to dust when a plane crashed into it.

To be more specific, skyscrapers are engineered to withstand such elements that it may possibly encounter such as plane crashes and destructive storms.

You're going to resign yourself to a belief that jet fuel fire brought down an entire ... no wait... three skyscrapers in one day? This has never happened before... ever... until 9/11.

I also will now leave the tinfoil-hat crowd to hide under their beds and shake at all the devious, clandestine, super-secret conspiracies that Bushco has come up with. I will just sit in the open and marvel at how efficiently they have kept a secret of this magnitude, involving so many people. Maybe if you understood physics you wouldn't have to resign yourself to trying to boost yourself up in a field you know nothing about to try to get the upperhand.

Cell phone calls from the plane?! At that altitude and position - people were getting cell phone calls?! This is impossible and you can't do or say anything to make it so.

[chuecaloversvv]

You're demanding a scenario that needs not be there for the event to take place. You don't need to remove interior walls to place explosive charges, especially when the core of the structure in situated next to the elevator shaft.

The video shows how they would have done it.



Everyone believes in gravity. Funny how building that were built tough to withstand just about anything crumbled to dust when a plane crashed into it.

To be more specific, skyscrapers are engineered to withstand such elements that it may possibly encounter such as plane crashes and destructive storms.

You're going to resign yourself to a belief that jet fuel fire brought down an entire ... no wait... three skyscrapers in one day? This has never happened before... ever... until 9/11.



Maybe if you understood physics you wouldn't have to resign yourself to trying to boost yourself up in a field you know nothing about to try to get the upperhand.

Cell phone calls from the plane?! At that altitude and position - people were getting cell phone calls?! This is impossible and you can't do or say anything to make it so.

When you pretend to make something a scientific truth, you just embarrass yourself, and demonstrate a woeful ignorance. I, myself, have made cell calls while flying over Nebraska at 30000 feet. To defend your absolute assertion, you HAVE to call me a liar, even though you have absolutely no basis. Your decaration that it is impossible simply shows that you are gullible enough to buy into something just because it dovetails with your hate of an administration that likely has never done anything at all to you, just because someone told you to. I have taken part in demonstrations that clearly show that five people, all eyewitnesses to a particular unexpected event, will have such varied descriptions that you have to wonder if they all saw the same thing.

[Staillateno]

You're going to resign yourself to a belief that jet fuel fire brought down an entire ... no wait... three skyscrapers in one day? This has never happened before... ever... until 9/11.

OK, I said I was outta here, but one last attempt at bringing one of these folks back to reality.

When, prior to 9/11, did a full size jet airliner hit a skyscraper?

Matt

[zU8KbeIU]

OK, I said I was outta here, but one last attempt at bringing one of these folks back to reality.

When, prior to 9/11, did a full size jet airliner hit a skyscraper?

Matt

How about a bomber hitting the Empire state building???

[gennickhif]

How about a bomber hitting the Empire state building???

That was a MUCH smaller, propeller plane. The Empire State Building is constructed of the post and beam style, where the WTC was constructed of the reinforced tube style. If this has to resort to apples and oranges, it just shows how weak your position really is.

[MaraReenece]

You're demanding a scenario that needs not be there for the event to take place. You don't need to remove interior walls to place explosive charges, especially when the core of the structure in situated next to the elevator shaft.

The video shows how they would have done it.



Everyone believes in gravity. Funny how building that were built tough to withstand just about anything crumbled to dust when a plane crashed into it.

To be more specific, skyscrapers are engineered to withstand such elements that it may possibly encounter such as plane crashes and destructive storms.

You're going to resign yourself to a belief that jet fuel fire brought down an entire ... no wait... three skyscrapers in one day? This has never happened before... ever... until 9/11.



Maybe if you understood physics you wouldn't have to resign yourself to trying to boost yourself up in a field you know nothing about to try to get the upperhand.

Cell phone calls from the plane?! At that altitude and position - people were getting cell phone calls?! This is impossible and you can't do or say anything to make it so.

Give me a break! The Twin Towers were 209 ft. wide each. The wing span of the Boeing was 156 ft. wide. That leaves 43 ft. How many columns to you reckon are left undamaged? Add jet fuel and fire to the equation and you've got weakened steel. Now what's going to hold the buildings up?
I think the conspiracy folks have visited the Twilight Zone one too many times.