Your belief about September, 11th, 2001

[Red Ice Player]

Originally Posted by kirant

That's a bit simplistic. You have to consider the plane's weight distribution. A large amount of it is placed in the centre/the "bullet" shape of it. The wings are very light. If we threw on wings on a bullet and fired that, going with your example, and it hit a mesh of steel and glass, the "wings" on the bullet would break pretty quick.

I'm not denying that the plane's centre should be able to smash through the walls, but the wings are very thin and weak.

Forgive the simplicity of my explanation. I saw the damned plane hit the the second tower so quite clearly it happened. I saw it. It wasn't a missile or a hologram. It was a huge airliner. Maybe it was a conspiracy that they couldn't make the walls stronger when they designed the buildings during the 60s? I really don't know what you are trying to imply.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by kirant

That's a bit simplistic. You have to consider the plane's weight distribution. A large amount of it is placed in the centre/the "bullet" shape of it. The wings are very light. If we threw on wings on a bullet and fired that, going with your example, and it hit a mesh of steel and glass, the "wings" on the bullet would break pretty quick.

I'm not denying that the plane's centre should be able to smash through the walls, but the wings are very thin and weak.

.....and moving at 400 mph would no doubt be carried inside the building by momentum, attached to the fuselage or not.

[Flabbibulin]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

I think it's rather ridiculous to assume that the Bush administration had the competency to pull off 9/11. It's possible that they knew about it and just let it happen, but beyond that, they had nothing to do with it.

This is a big part of my argument as well. Certainly the evidence would suggest that factions of the US government were aware of an impending attack on the United States, but I highly doubt they knew the specifics- it was simply a case of negligence and bad organization in the US intelligence network.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by oilyfan

That statement is plain wrong , the wings on a passenger jet aircraft are probably the strongest parts. They are designed to have incredible flex, they carry the engines that provide the thrust, and have to carry the weight of the aircraft. They acted like knives and sliced through the steel mesh easily.

Semi right. I did mistype when I meant the planes were weak. I meant that the planes wings do bend a good amount. The thing is that:
1) The plane hit the ground first from all accounts. So it wasn't going that stated 400+ mph and easily removed a LOT of its momentum. I think we'd be having a different story had it been a direct impact. (I'm no structural engineer though, so I may be wrong)
2) The tourque wings are suppose to take IMO are in the front-back direction of the plane, rotating around the wing/cockpit connection (to ensure safety when the engines run). This means that upon collision with a solid object from in front, they'll try to bend the wings to make up. This further weakens the damage to the building and pushes it onto the wing instead.
3) Apparantly, 1 wing hit the ground first.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Red Ice Player

Forgive the simplicity of my explanation. I saw the damned plane hit the the second tower so quite clearly it happened. I saw it. It wasn't a missile or a hologram. It was a huge airliner. Maybe it was a conspiracy that they couldn't make the walls stronger when they designed the buildings during the 60s? I really don't know what you are trying to imply.

Here's my simple reason back: If memory serves, the plane hit the ground at the Pentagon first. Sliding along the ground slows you down a lot.

[puckluck]

Wouldn't it make sense for Al-quada to come out and say they weren't responsible for 9/11? it would make America look like the bad guys if Al-quada would come out and say they had nothing to do with 9/11.

Anyone who thinks the American government had something to do with 9/11 is insane and lacks common sense, and that's not an insult, it's the truth. Do you know how many people would need to be in on a operation like this? and there is no way that many people could keep a secret or be expected to keep a secret for this long.

[Red Ice Player]

Originally Posted by kirant

Here's my simple reason back: If memory serves, the plane hit the ground at the Pentagon first. Sliding along the ground slows you down a lot.

I thought you were talking about the WTC. I didn't see the pentagon crash. As was stated earlier, there were many witnesses to the pentagon crash, and they found lots of pieces of Boeing 757 at the site. If you don't believe that, I will not debate this further.

[sa226]

Originally Posted by kirant

Semi right. I did mistype when I meant the planes were weak. I meant that the planes wings do bend a good amount. The thing is that:
1) The plane hit the ground first from all accounts. So it wasn't going that stated 400+ mph and easily removed a LOT of its momentum. I think we'd be having a different story had it been a direct impact. (I'm no structural engineer though, so I may be wrong)
2) The tourque wings are suppose to take IMO are in the front-back direction of the plane, rotating around the wing/cockpit connection (to ensure safety when the engines run). This means that upon collision with a solid object from in front, they'll try to bend the wings to make up. This further weakens the damage to the building and pushes it onto the wing instead.
3) Apparantly, 1 wing hit the ground first.

I'm not sure if this helps your theory but wings withstand exponentially more forces in the vertical than in the horizontal.

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by sa226

I'm not sure if this helps your theory but wings withstand exponentially more forces in the vertical than in the horizontal.

Yep. As mentioned, they're designed to flex vertically, which you will see if you're ever in a plane. Whereas forward/backward, they won't really flex. They'll simply break off.

[mikey_the_redneck]

The Bush Administration was, at least in part responsible for the attacks. They either had prior knowledge of, or flat out facilitated the 9/11 false flag terror attack..

The official 9/11 Commission Report is a total fraud, even the Commission members said so. I haven't read through the whole thread yet but the "debunking" of 9/11 conspiracy is laughable, even the much heralded holier than thou Popular Mechanics article everyone was circle jerking about last time.

Read David Ray Griffin's book Debunking 9/11 Debunking.

The best films that I have seen on the subject are as follows:

...and I did not include Loose Change as it is not near the beast out there..

This one is done by Richard Gage, the head of Architect and Engineers for 9/11 Truth of which there are a little over 1200 members, and those are just the ones that have the balls to join the organization.
http://freeviewdocumentaries.com/201...or-9-11-truth/

This one is called 9/11 Mysteries and shows a bunch of evidence of controlled demolition.
http://freeviewdocumentaries.com/201...911-mysteries/

This one focuses on the Pentagon attack, and absolutely irrefutably smashes the official version of events that occured on 9/11..LOTS of witness testimony.
http://freeviewdocumentaries.com/201...ecurity-alert/

I personally believe that the official investigation was a fraud and that a new one needs to be launched. I am certain it was a false flag black operation...

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Red Ice Player

I thought you were talking about the WTC. I didn't see the pentagon crash. As was stated earlier, there were many witnesses to the pentagon crash, and they found lots of pieces of Boeing 757 at the site. If you don't believe that, I will not debate this further.

I think we're agreeing with each other. There's nothing TO debate, as I agree with everything you just said.

Originally Posted by sa226

I'm not sure if this helps your theory but wings withstand exponentially more forces in the vertical than in the horizontal.

True. I didn't realize that until reading an article on them while waiting (though I should have known after thinking about it ). Though I think this could also mean that the wings could have crumpled and pushed straight into the plane's interior, contrary to what I said before, being that it might not be designed to take that type of punishment.

EDIT - The other option that exists is that the fuel lines in the wings could have ignited from friction while the plane was cut going through the outer walls. This could cause a flame and, under the high pressure, explosion and destroy the wing.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Beerfest

?

Maybe try rolling the plane 90 degrees (like what happend in reality).

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by puckluck

Wouldn't it make sense for Al-quada to come out and say they weren't responsible for 9/11? it would make America look like the bad guys if Al-quada would come out and say they had nothing to do with 9/11.

Anyone who thinks the American government had something to do with 9/11 is insane and lacks common sense, and that's not an insult, it's the truth. Do you know how many people would need to be in on a operation like this? and there is no way that many people could keep a secret or be expected to keep a secret for this long.

I'm pretty sure I remember seeing a video released by Al Quada saying they HAD done it. Osama and his buddies all sitting around discussing the event.

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

This is a big part of my argument as well. Certainly the evidence would suggest that factions of the US government were aware of an impending attack on the United States, but I highly doubt they knew the specifics- it was simply a case of negligence and bad organization in the US intelligence network.

I realized the inability of the US government to conduct that sort of conspiracy after the Iraq war. Why didn't they plant any WMD's? If they were an evil genius, they sure weren't very good at it. Certainly not good enough to conduct something that much more complicated.

[mikey_the_redneck]

The collapse of WTC Building 7 was what really grabbed my curiosity.

You have a building that had relatively minor debris damage one on corner of the building and fires spread over roughly 7 floors.....then the whole thing takes the path of most resistance in virtual free-fall speed into it's own footprint......my common sense tells me something is not right.

Then you got all this confirmed thermite explosive flakes found in many WTC dust samples, and the dust itself had the by-products of a thermite reaction taking place and the pools of witness-confirmed molten steel under the rubble....folks only an incindiery of some kind can produce the extreme temperatures to produce molten iron...

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

I'm pretty sure I remember seeing a video released by Al Quada saying they HAD done it. Osama and his buddies all sitting around discussing the event.

If you go to the FBI website you can view the Osama Bin Laden terrorist wanted poster. They list many terror attacks on it but he is not wanted for 9/11, because there is no hard evidence of his involvment. The reason the US invaded Afghanistan was because the Taliban would not turn over Bin Laden without proof of his guilt. The U.S., aside from the silly video tapes which are controversial themselves, has no evidence.

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

The collapse of WTC Building 7 was what really grabbed my curiosity.

You have a building that had relatively minor debris damage one on corner of the building and fires spread over roughly 7 floors.....then the whole thing takes the path of most resistance in virtual free-fall speed into it's own footprint......my common sense tells me something is not right.

Then you got all this confirmed thermite explosive flakes found in many WTC dust samples, and the dust itself had the by-products of a thermite reaction taking place and the pools of witness-confirmed molten steel under the rubble....folks only an incindiery of some kind can produce the extreme temperatures to produce molten iron...

You sound like a narrator on some of those youtube videos.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by oilyfan

Let me spell it out then:

9/11 conspiracy theories - discredited by mainstream technical experts

Like who?

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

The collapse of WTC Building 7 was what really grabbed my curiosity.

You have a building that had relatively minor debris damage one on corner of the building and fires spread over roughly 7 floors.....then the whole thing takes the path of most resistance in virtual free-fall speed into it's own footprint......my common sense tells me something is not right.

Then you got all this confirmed thermite explosive flakes found in many WTC dust samples, and the dust itself had the by-products of a thermite reaction taking place and the pools of witness-confirmed molten steel under the rubble....folks only an incindiery of some kind can produce the extreme temperatures to produce molten iron...

I'm not going to bother with the collapse thing and how badly the building was damaged, etc. If you have read actual engineering reports and were not convinced, I'm not going to be able to convince you. If you haven't done your research properly, you won't read what I say anyway.

The thermite theory is interesting though... I'm assuming you're referring to barium nitrate being found.

Presence of barium nitrate, the supposed smoking gun of the thermite theory, is indicative of either thermite-induced demolition or burning of computer circuit boards. I can't imagine where a bunch of burned computers would come from in an office building that was on fire.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

The collapse of WTC Building 7 was what really grabbed my curiosity.

You have a building that had relatively minor debris damage one on corner of the building and fires spread over roughly 7 floors.....then the whole thing takes the path of most resistance in virtual free-fall speed into it's own footprint......my common sense tells me something is not right.

Then you got all this confirmed thermite explosive flakes found in many WTC dust samples, and the dust itself had the by-products of a thermite reaction taking place and the pools of witness-confirmed molten steel under the rubble....folks only an incindiery of some kind can produce the extreme temperatures to produce molten iron...

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

I haven't had a chance to read through that page myself, but tell me if it answers your questions.