Jackalope wrote:Yup the intire roof of the plant caved in, almost killed a couple fire fighters in the process
Now it the weight of the roof was enough to buckle the beams and colapse the roof in on itself why is it so much of a strech to belive that between the burning fuel and the weight of the floors above would deffinently have colapsed then the way it happened.
No bombs, No missle, no demolision teams, just a plane full of jet fuel and the weight of the floors above the fire. 2 + 2 = 4
But the "explosions" that were heard just befor ethe buildings colapsed in on themselves, Um that was the concrete that made up the buildings buckleing and brakeing. Have any of you heard concrete brakeing from stress like that ? Well if you've ever watched a railroad rip down an old concrete structure it sure sounds like a hell of a bang before it falls down. I watched the CSX tear down an old concrete coaling tower, Now true there were indeed explosions but after the charges went off the structure was pulled over by huge craines and when those last 2 legs went in sounded like another explosion even tho it was just the building colapsing.
Quote:
So this is what the conspiricy theory is...
1. Planes fly into buildings.
2. The government orchestrates the demolition of a tower, a burning building with questionable structural integrity.
3. They sneak in with explosives, plant them in the appropriate area, undetected by the thousands of people trying to get out and hundreds of video cameras taping everything from everywhere.
4. Then, in a perfect implosion of a building that's wobbly to begin with, they kill innocent civilians, firefighters, army personel and police.
Nope, not buying it. Not enough time to plan where the explosives need to go, impossible to sneak past all those camcorders, no benifit to the US to do it.
Hahahaha wrote:one more time.. The Fire dept evidence does not agree http://www.rense.com/general39/points.htm
Not determining the truth dishonours the memory of those who died. Not preventing furthur collapse by not investigating may lead to more death. Why were investigators denied access? Why was the evidence destroyed?
PAX
Rob S wrote:^^^^
Plane hitting the Pentagon and killing no one??? WTF are you talking about 189 people died there.
Anyways who gives a @!#$ that they wont release the tapes. All your going to see is a plane hitting a building killing many innocent victims. Do we really need to go and show and that on every damn news network and have two gazillion people sit and anayzle it for days on end. I dont think so, infact I dont want to see it is hard enough to watch the twin towers being hit with planes.
ShiftyCav wrote:
well in the video the guy said that the power to the cameras was TURNED OFF, so there would be no cameras there to tape anything. The government has access to anything, so they could say they are inspecting the walls or something and plant explosives easily.
ShiftyCav wrote:do you just take what teh government tells you to believe and go with it? are you really that gullible. and why would they plant the bombs when this is going on, they do it weeks in advance, in this thing we call PLANNING. Greedy bastards like this dont care about who they hurt or destroy, they just need to make a profit and byt doing this is making a profit. maybe Osama had a vendetta against Saddam and paid us to do all this in order to oust him.
Cory Forson wrote:
See heres the thing, how do you KNOW 189 people died there if no one has ever seen it? Where is all the proof that you so blindly follow?
Quote:
So the government knew exactly which floor and from what direction a suicide bomber would fly in, so they would know where to place the explosives. That's a lot of confidence in pilots who aren't that experienced and MISSED hitting the Capitol building and the White House
ShiftyCav wrote:are you retarded. they plated them throughout the bldg and you see all those little explosions, which didnt happen around where the planes hit, giving some kind of proof that little explosions were happeneing. this gives credit to those who say there were "bombs" going off. who knows if anyone was in the plane, maybe it was on autopilot
Quote:
So planes on Autopilot are flown into the wtc, exactly where the government placed explosives. All this on the order of Osama so we could get Saddam, and make money doing it.
Quote:
What you're suggesting is well beyond anything based in reality. What possible motive would our government have for wiring the wtc buildings with explosives and flying planes into them?
Hahahaha wrote:The firefighters said they had two isolated fires and only needed two lines to put them out.What floor were they on?
Quote:Up and out? Was this pre-collapse? What tower?
I also saw the thing on discovery and it made sense until I saw the explosions registered 2.0 on the ricter scale, and that debis was thrown upward and outward.
Quote:What composition was the metal? If the metal was molten (not plastic), the sudden pressure that built up during the initial failure, the fall and then final settling and compacting would possibly explain that... due to the debris, you couldn't really see where each column support landed or how it might have twisted.
On top of that the thermal hotspots after the colapse do not line up with the molten steel in the basement, indicating a fire of at least 3000 deg.F with no such combustables present.
Quote:I'd like to see the GCMS composite analyses before I agree with that.
It has all the markings of high explosives.
Quote:The Fire Marshall's report didn't mention any trace or explosives residues found.
The white powdered concrete, the evidence of extremely high temps (maybe thermite), etc..
Quote:Again, on what floor, and from what I remember seeing, there was accelleration in the initial failures, which indicated that there was some resistance. I'm only going by memory, mind you.
The time to fall is signifigant as well. It fell at the speed of gravity, unimpeeded, no resistance at all. On top of the, the firefighters saying that the fire was mostly out, and not indicating any concern about structural integrity in their radio conversations.
Quote:Pressurised kerosene acts differently than vaporised kerosene. If you look at the initial impact, there was a large fireball immediately proceeding the impact of the wings, and that would have been the pressurised cabin air spewing out. Also, you have to know that the oxygen systems onboard the aircraft (the little yellow facemasks that drop down after a drop in pressure) would have acted as a consistant accelerant (the chemicals don't react to fire, but when they react to eachother, they produce oxygen). The chemical, when spent, leaves a white and grey powered substance. The same thing was found in the debris of the ValueJet liner that crashed in the Florida Everglades... the original thought was high explosives, but it was ruled out... that was my original thought when you mentioned the powdered concrete.
Your kerosene heater could never heat such a large space to the maximum flame temperature it can acheive, same with the interior of the buildings. I don't believe that the heat was insolated considering the huge gaping holes and the smoke pouring out.
Quote:The load-bearing members in the basement are a different formulation of steel in the basements... usually higher Manganese content if I remember correctly.
I don't know if 875 is hot enough to soften the steel framework, but I do know it took 3000 deg to produce the molten steel found in the basement.
Quote:I may be wrong about WTC 1 & 2, but most sky scrapers have an internal "spine" column set, and the floors are "hung" off that spine (of course, there's the exterior and secondary supports). If you knock out the central spine, you'll topple the building.
I also know that the building was built much like a screen in a window.
Quote:
You can poke holes in it, but it still supports itself. It was designed that way on purpose, to withstand a 707 impact. I also know that no other building of this type has ever colapsed due to fire, yet 3 did that day. I know that 1 and 2 had renforced bulkhead type floors space throughout the structure to be able to support the entire structure above and that they should have at least slowed the collapse but it fell unimpeeded.
Quote:True, but in my mind, the only thing sinister that went on was in the actions of the 19 terrorists. We don't yet know what happened in full, I mean, down to the actual beam breakage... Once we know that, we'll be able to figure it out, but that's going to be a long time in coming IMHO.
I cannot tell you what all this means, only that there is much more than meets the eye going on here.
Quote:I think that it's possible that there is a bunch of coincidences... I mean, look at it like this:
Interesting that contractors had unimpeeded access to the building for the previous two weeks because of a combination of renovations and a security system failure. Why was FEMA practicing right off long island? Why was there a test of the FIA systems that day with 22 reported highjackings because of a symultanious drill (test)?
Quote:
There are too many things that don't add up.
How did an airliner that vapourized while making a 16 foot entry hole also make a 16 foot exit hole? And leave behind parts that belong to a different type of aircraft?
PAX
Quote:
Bush and friends and such have way to many hands in way to many pots. There are all kinds of reason for them to do something like this. He has hired his friends companies to repair the damage done by many of the things he has done. His brother or cousin was the head of the agency responisble for the security system of the WTC. His ratings werent that good the election was a scandal he was looking for something to pin on Sadam and though he couldnt use this he could use the Taliban to blame. The leader is a Bin Laden good friend of the Bush family. What reason was there to suspect that the Taliban ran to Iraq in all of this? In order for them to get there its a 800+ mile trip through Iran. I could keep going but. There are reasons for someone in the goverment to do it when it benefits them. We dont think it would happen because we are think we are to moral of a country to have leaders that would do these things. So if you want to ask do I think its possible that our goverment had something to do about this absolutely I there there is a possiblity that the goverment could have had something to do with it I just doubt goog ol GW is smart enough to pull it off on his own.