the cold hard scientific facts: 9/11 was an inside job

POSTED BY: antimason
UPDATED: Sunday, January 14, 2007 09:17
VIEWED: 15140
PAGE 8 of 13

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE

AURAPTOR

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:12 AM

I know it's been said to death, and if not, it should have been, but the WTC Towers 1 and 2 were built in a radically different manner than previous sky scrapers. Using examples of other tall buildings doesn't translate to what happened on 9/11. But of course, anyone who had taken the time to study this primary factor would have never posted a silly thread about conspiracy theories on fff.net in the first place.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

BUFFALOPHIL

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:

thats silly. your saying a few floors of fires caused 80+ stories to implode! im saying prove it? show me the physics.. its impossible. the plane alone damaged a few floors, not the entire structure; it would have caused a fragmented collapse, not a perfect controlled demolition

You idiot. All they had to do was hit the building near the middle. Then, the steel would soften, causing bending. The bending would increase, until the upper floors were forced to fall down on their center of gravity (i.e. straight down, jackhole); the top thirty to forty stories were falling down into the bottom sixty! Of course the damn building fell in less than twenty seconds! Dear God, why are you still propagating this crap?

"I cannot abide useless people."

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
thats silly. your saying a few floors of fires caused 80+ stories to implode! im saying prove it? show me the physics.. its impossible. the plane alone damaged a few floors, not the entire structure; it would have caused a fragmented collapse, not a perfect controlled demolition

“The structural analyses of this study on components, subsystem, isolated exterior walls and cores, and global models of the WTC1 and WTC2, as well as observations from photos and videos taken during events, showed that the tower collapses were caused by combined effects of the structural and thermal insulation damage from aircraft impact and the subsequent intense fires. [[]emphasis mine[]]”
-- Global Structural Analysis of the Response of the World Trade Center Towers to Impact Damage and fire, National Institute of Standards and Technology
http://wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-6index.htm

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RAZZA

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
how did building 7 collapse?

I assume you believe that WTC7 did not sustain significant damage and therefore, there was no reason for it to collapse. I submit that your assumptions of the damage are incorrect, and eyewitness accounts from firemen on the scene support my submission.

Quote:
Battalion Chief John Norman
Special Operations Command - 22 years

From there, we looked out at 7 World Trade Center again. You could see smoke, but no visible fire, and some damage to the south face. You couldn’t really see from where we were on the west face of the building, but at the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/norman.html

Quote:
Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years

Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html

Quote:
...Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHI
C/9110462.PDF

Quote:
The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-634

Quote:
Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Division 1 - 33 years

...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html

So, I guess now your conspiracy theory also includes members of the NYFD who would be complicit in the loss of hundreds of their brethren! The scope of your conspiracy is truly broad, and any good conspiracist knows that the fewer people who know, the better!

-----------------
"There is not

RUE

Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:22 AM

What I wonder about is how the Royal House of Saud got this information to Cheney, Rice et al while at the same time bypassing dubya on the exact details.

ANTHONYT

Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:35 AM

"I don't see where the Bush administration has to be in the middle of the plot to knowingly take advantage of it."

Amen, brother. The #1 Political response to any event: "How can we spin this to our advantage?"

--Anthony

Edited to add: Also the #1 response of conspiracy theorists, apparently...

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

YINYANG

Thursday, January 11, 2007 4:47 AM

Quote:
the cold hard scientific facts: 9/11 was an inside job

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2-

It doesn't and that's where the theory falls apart. Huge conspiracies are hard to keep, the more people involved the greater the risk.

sure buddy.. the US government has no secrets?? wheres your proof.. as its the crux of your arguement?? (i guess you wouldnt have proof.. because it there are secrets, theyd be SECRET!) get real

Quote:
This theory looks at the end result, is unable to believe that the actions taken on 9/11 could ahve brought about that result and then tries to construct a hypothasis that is a more "satisfactory answer."

no.. you were told it was Osama bin laden and 19 hijackers, when OSAMA HIMSELF admits, along with the FBIS OWN PAGE, that he had nothing to do with 9/11! you obviously havent seen the work of Peter Lance, who uncovered MASSIVE FBI and CIA coverups envolving members of alqaeda, and the connections with OUR OWN ESTABLISHMENT prior to 9/11. you can deny that evidence all day long.. it only furthers our theory and punches another whole in yours

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
So you have testimony that Cheney was reluctant to shoot down a plane full of innocent people. And that’s your evidence that Cheney wanted to kill thousands of other innocent people? You really have to be a true believer to think that this is convincing evidence for your case.

this is why you werent in charge: shoot down the plane and lose the passengers, or LOSE THE PLANE ANYWAY and lose the targeted impact zone aswell! think about it... it hurts the official rediculous theory because Cheney is shown allowing the terror attack to occur! just as their political motives dictated

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Why don't you just come out and say ...It's INCONCEIVABLE.!!. That way, we could respond in Inigo Montoya like fashion, - " You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." Fact is, despite your incredulity, that is EXACTLY what happened. 19 highly motivated, well financed and trained men took advantage of us in a way that most of the general populace thought never could happen. Which is EXACTLY why they did it. Because we weren't looking.

why dont you say what you really mean.. that the muslim world is a greater threat than communism and fascism ever was! you want me to believe that? show me the # of terrorist attacks, and prove to me that the RISK is proportionate with the TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS being spent right now in washington. your the fool for believing that radical Islam will ever convert the western world, thats the conspiracy theory

Quote:
That's been addressed, time and time again. Only you ignore the facts.

how then? lets debate it... since no plane hit it, why was it the FIRST EVER BUILDING TO implode into itself from fire, in a matter of hrs no less. maybe if a number of government offices werent located their, with specific intelligence records.. OH NEVER MIND! youre right... the terrorists magically brought that one down too!

Quote:
You presume this is true ? Why ? Kooky internet web sites that offer nothing more than specious 'evidence'? What's so sad about dupes like you is that it diverts our attention away from what really DID happen.

yah.. takes the attention off of this creation of alqaeda, and forces Bush and his Nazis to patroll the internet, tap domestic phone lines and remove habeaus corpus. you sheep... you stand their proudly, giving hail to your fascist leaders as they steal everything away from you- and you beg for more, while driveling your homages to them. one day, you all will learn the hard way that these men could give a f=ck less about you all

Quote:
It allows you to ignore the evil that was committed against your country and to members of practically every nation on the planet.

no.. it allows you to burry your head in the sand here in AMerica, and rest assured each night that big brother government will protect you; as it systematically removes every God given freedom allowed by the constitution. your such a socialist, you dont want a rule of law, you want mob rule..

Quote:
Shame on you. Shame for your gullibility and ignorance.

shame on you, for giving the Nazis in power the go ahead to rape the hell out of American traditions and place us in a never ending war.

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE