Go to YouTube a search for videos of controlled demolitions (I think you can find the Calgary General Hospital among others), most buildings actually require very few explosives to cause the catastrophic failure that will make the building fall. Once the supports are destabilized, gravity and inertia do most of the work.
The WTC towers actually stood for quite a long time after the planes hit, but after the fires burned for so long, the steel finally weakened to the point of failure, and they fell...just like a building in a controlled demolition (although, there was definitely a lot of damage to surrounding buildings - so, they definitely weren't "clean" collapses), not because they were controlled demolitions but because controlled demolitions take advantage of a building's natural tendencies to collapse in a certain way, which is the same way the WTC towers fell.
Your comments that I bolded could not be further from the truth.
You should be afraid to use your barbeque, the heat over a period of time could cause it to suddenly collapse.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
This site debunks the 9/11 conspiracy in great detail. Just a sample of evidence
Quote:
NIST’s findings also do not support the “controlled demolition” theory since there is conclusive evidence that:
the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else, and;
the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors.
Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation.
In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.
LOL, is there even any indication that mock-up is to scale?
How do we know the plan crashed in a horizontal orientation?
Conspiracy theorists will always amplify the smallest anomalies to monumental proportions, yet ignore monumentally solid facts to back their tin foil hat theories. Jed the plumber some how becomes an expert on aviation science and explosives. What kicked off the moon debate? Wasn't it a shadow on the ground?
Honestly, if 9/11 was a conspiracy, how the heck would you keep everyone involved silent? It would take 1000's of people to co-ordinate that, and not one would have come forward?.....please. Yes not one person noticed a team of demolition experts planting charges in 2 of the worlds largest buildings.... gimme a break.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to pylon For This Useful Post:
I honestly don't have words to describe how disappointed I am to see educated (maybe) Canadians having an honest debate about 9/11. The idea that the American government killed 3000 of it's own citizens to invade Iraq is maddeningly stupid. Did GW Bush strike anyone as someone who cared what anyone thought? This is the guy who referred to himself as "the decider" and thought he was doing gods work. He didn't want or need the approval of the American people for his wars- god already "gave it" to him.
Last edited by theonlywhiteout; 10-18-2010 at 12:09 AM.
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.
What engineering reports?
NIST? Fema?
It took NIST YEARS to come out with their report on building 7. They retracted the initial report and released a new one later. They had a couple employees complain and one who resigned from NIST. NIST did not even take into account the molten iron on site, or the explosives evidence....it was a white wash.
I honestly don't have words to describe how disappointed to see educated (maybe) Canadians having an honest debate about 9/11. The idea that the American government killed 3000 of it's own citizens to invade Iraq is maddeningly stupid. Did GW Bush strike anyone as someone who cared what anyone thought? This is the guy who referred to himself as "the decider" and thought he was doing gods work. He didn't want or need the approval of the American people for his wars- god already "gave it" to him.
What a bunch of false statements in that little piece there. There was tons of eye witness testimony from fire fighters and WTC employees reporting secondary explosions in the lower lobby and basement floors separate from the air plane impacts.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck
What a bunch of false statements in that little piece there. There was tons of eye witness testimony from fire fighters and WTC employees reporting secondary explosions in the lower lobby and basement floors separate from the air plane impacts.
Give us your detailed facts that debunks the article.
LOL, is there even any indication that mock-up is to scale?
How do we know the plan crashed in a horizontal orientation?
Conspiracy theorists will always amplify the smallest anomalies to monumental proportions, yet ignore monumentally solid facts to back their tin foil hat theories. Jed the plumber some how becomes an expert on aviation science and explosives. What kicked off the moon debate? Wasn't it a shadow on the ground?
Honestly, if 9/11 was a conspiracy, how the heck would you keep everyone involved silent? It would take 1000's of people to co-ordinate that, and not one would have come forward?.....please. Yes not one person noticed a team of demolition experts planting charges in 2 of the worlds largest buildings.... gimme a break.
Haha I made the same point to a real crazy the other day, she responded with, "well they were built into the columns."
Me: Back in the 70s?
Her: Yes! This has been going on for a long time, do you think it's just a coincidence both Bush Sr. and Jr. were President?
Me: Uhhhhh...
__________________
As you can see, I'm completely ridiculous.
If you read the book the looming tower it does a pretty good job of proving Al-Qaeda's roll in 9/11. Also read Ghost Wars which goes from the formation of Al-Queda and their actions leading up to Sept 10.
Did the books mention how people like FBI agent John O'Neill, Sibel Edmonds, Anthony Shaffer and others who had all the Saudi hijackers tracked but were blocked from doing anything??
The Pentagon is one of the most, if not the most highly guarded buildings in the world.
Tons of camera's must be filming it at all times, yet no clear video has been released showing a plane hitting the Pentagon, sure seems kinda odd.
Have you maybe considered that the goverment does not want to release video from the most highly guarded buildings in the world for security reasons?
Anyhow, if you visit this site http://911research.com , you will get to see all the evidence you need. Charred bodies, plane parts and all. Here is a very logical exerpt off of the site by an obviously rational sane thinker:
1. That the scores of eyewitness reports of a jetliner were faked, coerced, or coincidentally mistaken.
2. That the damage to the Pentagon, including an approximately 100-foot-wide expanse of punctured facade walls on the first floor, were somehow produced by a means other than a plane.
3. That fires that smelled like burning jet fuel, running about 200 feet across the facade of the Pentagon, were produced by some other means, or the photographs were faked.
4. That the aircraft debris, some of it clearly identifiable as from an American Airliners 757, was planted.
5. That the swath of downed lamp-poles the width of a 757's wing span were sliced and knocked over by some other means, and that smashed objects lying in the paths of the engines were damaged by some other means.
6. That the identification of human remains of Flight77's crew and passengers was fraudulent.
7. That Flight 77 was destroyed and all on board were disposed of at some unknown location.
To believe that the Pentagon was not hit by Flight 77 requires one to accept points 6 and 7. To believe that no plane hit the Pentagon, one has to accept all seven points.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to pylon For This Useful Post:
I haven't had a chance to read through that page myself, but tell me if it answers your questions.
I have seen that page before. My problem with the thermite is that it wasn't addressed in the Commission Report and was ignored by NIST.....I don't believe that I implied thermite was used to make those angle cuts, but it must have been used somewhere to explain the presence of thermite.
You can't exactly get thermite at Walmart so it is quite suspicious...
There needs to be a proper investigation.
Last edited by mikey_the_redneck; 10-18-2010 at 12:41 AM.
