[Steve A]

Originally Posted by briers

I can understand this type of thread might upset or even anger some.

But there is a a lot of evidence suggesting that it wasn't as straight forward as some think.

I will pick out the most important part of the big post i made early on in this thread. That the building collapsed at near freefall. I.e. the same speed/time to hit the ground as dropping a snooker ball off the roof.

Also, very importantly, just 4 days ago, a Dutch scientist published a 2 year paper on how nano thermite (a highly reactive, high energy explosive) was found in the dust of the WTC's.

The basic physics says that steel does not loose it's structural integrity or even weeken below it's melting point which is higher than the even the most efficient fuel fire.

There was also reports of explosions from people on the ground prior to the collapse and even 3 whistle blows can be heard seconds below the collapse.

It's not possible for a building that size to fall into itself at freefall speed. Especially when the official theory was pancacking, i.e floors collapsing onto each other.

Molten steel can also been seen very clearly on many of the vidoes on youtube, molten steel dripping from the structure 3/4 of the way up. And also, watching the collapse video's you clearly see the building fold in on itself just above the impact zone. Buildings do not collapse from the top down where the littlest weight is.

Also you can see video's of the lobby, shattered glass everywhere yet even 20 stories below the impact zone floors and windows were still intact.


There are plenty of rational videos floating around

http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-evid...on-on-911.html

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/t..._residues.html

I'm raising this point because the whole thing just doesn't seem right. Many are extremely disturbed by what they witnessed that they don't know what to think. I look at it, and everytime i do it just doesn't seem right and there is a small but growing group of people out there thinking the same thing. This is so serious, we deserve to know the truth.

Not 1 criminal investigation has been opened in 9 years.

Most evidence destroyed and less money spent investigating this than investigating Mr Clinton in his sex scandal with that fat whore.

great links

[Steve A]

Just one two

This is MIT structural engineer Jeffs king technical viewpoint. Very respected man and nothing to do with David icke

[briers]

Originally Posted by NFS

This can be seen on all of the film of the collapse and is in fact one reason why I reject any argument that this was a controlled demolition. Controlled demolition is done at the base of structures. But the WTC towers demolished themselves from the top down.

There is lots of good information about steel in fire here:

http://www.corusconstruction.com/fil...0buildings.pdf

That's ok, i'm not a preacher and everyone has their own opinions

I just have tonnes of questions which i want someone to answer



Lets both assume the steel did weaken enough to buckle and collapse.

Why did the president lie about it on national TV - he said he watched the first plane hit the towers on TV before he went into the classroom of kids. There was NO live coverage of the first plane strike.

How on earth did the towers collapse into their footprints at free fall speed

Building 7 was clearly demolished - how did they plant the charges in such quick time

Why the record number of forward selling of AA shares on the stock market - 3-4times higher than any point in history. People knew.

Why did the lobby look like a bomb had hit it, when floors just 20 stories below were intact.

Why did live news feeds interviewing people on the ground, on the day report explosions

Why did they get rid of all the evidence

Why no criminal investigation

Why did rumsfeld take control of norad, flight training, the frist time in history on the day of the attacks, and make the pilots train in a hijacking scenario, 100's of miles north.

Why would the worlds biggest superpower let airliners go 100's of miles of course without escorting or at worst shooting down. We intercept russian jets within minutes on our scottish borders.

Why did Bush stumble over his words when it was suggested inside knowledge of this

Why did survivors of the collapse state on TV interviews they witnessed excessive drilling and their offices covered in layers of dust weeks before the collapse

Why can explosions clearly be seen at random floors below, before and during the collapse

How was molten steel dripping from the building (a characteristic of thermite) just before the collapse when the smoke was black, essentially a starved cool fire.

Was this dutch scientist that found significant amounts of nano termite in the dust sample lying?

The photo evidence shows steel beams cut at 45 degrees, something that suggests a thermite charge as it allows the building to fall in on itself.

How did they manage to find a passport of a hijacker at ground zero when everything else was turned to dust

Larry Silverstein had even admitted on TV he made the decision to "pull" WTC7 which is a term for blow it up.

He also admitted renegotiating an insurance deal which would cover him for acts of terrorism just months before this happened.

He also admitted the towers are inefficient in design, costing hundreds of millions a year just for the window cleaning contract.


I could go on

But all these questions bug me, i want to know the truth and no body can answer them sufficiently to satisfy me.

[Dave_3]

Originally Posted by xenon

If people want to believe it NFS, you won't convince them otherwise with facts. They'll see what they want to see.

Agree.

Still open-jawed at the way "documentaries" made in bedrooms by kids using YouTUBE and Google, and 3rd person reports are clung to as solid fact. In the "fog of war" statements are passed along and grow legs - you can clearly see it in the amatuer footage as rumours are spreading like wild fire.

In the cold light of day, most of these "facts" have no substance.

Steve, if you believe that an Airliner was hijacked, then replaced with another carrying special pods .... where were all the people who boarded the plane at the airport and called people on their mobile phones ?

You need thousands of people involved if you believe those "Documentaries" :

• People who sourced vast amounts of demolition charges (or vast amounts of new super secret hypothetical explosives)
• People who planted the super secret explosives in multiple buildings undetected
• People who created intelligence radio/internet chatter in foreign langauge and allow to be intercepted by US and UK intelligence agencies
• People who bought/sourced an Airliner(s)
• People who modified the Airliner with secret pods for missiles, and blanked out the windows.
• People who co-ordinated the "highjacking" of all the planes ..
• People who flew/controlled the swapped "Airliner", which had no windows, strange markings and pods into the building (with the worlds media covering the entire event at this time)
• People who "disposed" of all the crew and passengers that boarded the real planes at the airport.
• People who covered up the landing of the real pane, and "silenced" ground staff that were there
• People who disposed of the plane that landed
• People who were involved in the organised "insider trading" prior to the event
• People who controllled events on the ground during the day, setting off controlled charges - that weren't affected by plane crashes (and set off in a way that our experts on this thread think shows that there were explosives set-off)
• People who faked/staged the radio chatter and cell phone communications from Flight 93
• People who launched a cruise missile at the pentagon
• People on the ground, highway and in the air who later swore that it was an Airliner
• People who organised all of this under the gaze of the worlds media and nobody talked, or slipped up - and would murder thousands
• People to hide evidence at ground zero
• People to fabricate the offical 911 report
• Direct involvement by top membes in the Govt. to co-ordinate all these people

Alternatively, 4 fanatical, trained groups managed to take control of planes and fly them into buildings - with a 75% hit rate.

D.

[xenon]

Originally Posted by briers

Why the record number of forward selling of AA shares on the stock market - 3-4times higher than any point in history. People knew.

Which people? I guess you're implying those invloved in the cover up.

Are you seriously suggesting that the people who "knew" in advance, at the very highest echelons of government and secret service, then thought "I know, I'll feather my nest whilst am at it" and dumped thousands of shares in AA?

I suspect that this, like the other questions, can be answered satisfactorily and probably have been if you look properly.

Re. Bush talking about the first plane hitting the towers BEFORE seeing the children I'd like to see footage of that.

[xenon]

Originally Posted by Dave_3

Agree.

Still open-jawed at the way "documentaries" made in bedrooms by kids using YouTUBE and Google, and 3rd person reports are clung to as solid fact. In the "fog of war" statements are passed along and grow legs - you can clearly see it in the amatuer footage as rumours are spreading like wild fire.

In the cold light of day, most of these "facts" have no substance.

Steve, if you believe that an Airliner was hijacked, then replaced with another carrying special pods .... where were all the people who boarded the plane at the airport and called people on their mobile phones ?

You need thousands of people involved if you believe those "Documentaries" :

• People who sourced vast amounts of demolition charges (or vast amounts of new super secret hypothetical explosives)
• People who planted the super secret explosives in multiple buildings undetected
• People who bought/sourced an Airliner(s)
• People who modified the Airliner with secret pods for missiles, and blanked out the windows.
• People who co-ordinated the "highjacking" of all the planes ..
• People who flew/controlled the swapped "Airliner", which had no windows, strange markings and pods into the building (with the worlds media covering the entire event at this time)
• People who "disposed" of all the crew and passengers that boarded the real planes at the airport.
• People who covered up the landing of the real pane, and "silenced" ground staff that were there
• People who disposed of the plane that landed
• People who were involved in the organised "insider trading" prior to the event
• People who controllled events on the ground during the day, setting off controlled charges - that weren't affected by plane crashes (and set off in a way that our experts on this thread think shows that there were explosives set-off)
• People who faked/staged the radio chatter and cell phone communications from Flight 93
• People who launched a cruise missile at the pentagon
• People on the ground, highway and in the air who later swore that it was an Airliner
• People who organised all of this under the gaze of the worlds media and nobody talked, or slipped up - and would murder thousands
• People to hide evidence at ground zero
• People to fabricate the offical 911 report
• Direct involvement by top membes in the Govt. to co-ordinate all these people

Alternatively, 4 fanatical, trained groups managed to take control of planes and fly them into buildings - with a 75% hit rate.

D.

Perfect. Here endeth the lesson.

Four lunatics or a cast of thousands prepared to undertake mass murder.

[sheps]

Originally Posted by xenon

Re. Bush talking about the first plane hitting the towers BEFORE seeing the children I'd like to see footage of that.

Watch this

[SpmnE9zero]

Originally Posted by briers

That's ok, i'm not a preacher and everyone has their own opinions

I just have tonnes of questions which i want someone to answer



Lets both assume the steel did weaken enough to buckle and collapse.

Why did the president lie about it on national TV - he said he watched the first plane hit the towers on TV before he went into the classroom of kids. There was NO live coverage of the first plane strike.

How on earth did the towers collapse into their footprints at free fall speed

Building 7 was clearly demolished - how did they plant the charges in such quick time

Why the record number of forward selling of AA shares on the stock market - 3-4times higher than any point in history. People knew.

Why did the lobby look like a bomb had hit it, when floors just 20 stories below were intact.

Why did live news feeds interviewing people on the ground, on the day report explosions

Why did they get rid of all the evidence

Why no criminal investigation

Why did rumsfeld take control of norad, flight training, the frist time in history on the day of the attacks, and make the pilots train in a hijacking scenario, 100's of miles north.

Why would the worlds biggest superpower let airliners go 100's of miles of course without escorting or at worst shooting down. We intercept russian jets within minutes on our scottish borders.

Why did Bush stumble over his words when it was suggested inside knowledge of this

Why did survivors of the collapse state on TV interviews they witnessed excessive drilling and their offices covered in layers of dust weeks before the collapse

Why can explosions clearly be seen at random floors below, before and during the collapse

How was molten steel dripping from the building (a characteristic of thermite) just before the collapse when the smoke was black, essentially a starved cool fire.

Was this dutch scientist that found significant amounts of nano termite in the dust sample lying?

The photo evidence shows steel beams cut at 45 degrees, something that suggests a thermite charge as it allows the building to fall in on itself.

How did they manage to find a passport of a hijacker at ground zero when everything else was turned to dust

Larry Silverstein had even admitted on TV he made the decision to "pull" WTC7 which is a term for blow it up.

He also admitted renegotiating an insurance deal which would cover him for acts of terrorism just months before this happened.

He also admitted the towers are inefficient in design, costing hundreds of millions a year just for the window cleaning contract.


I could go on

But all these questions bug me, i want to know the truth and no body can answer them sufficiently to satisfy me.

Sounds likes someone else watched "Loose Change" - again not that I believe it all, but this video REALLY made me open my eyes to the fact that something else besides what has been told to us may have happened.

[Dave_3]

Originally Posted by briers

That's ok, i'm not a preacher and everyone has their own opinions

I just have tonnes of questions which i want someone to answer



Lets both assume the steel did weaken enough to buckle and collapse.

Why did the president lie about it on national TV - he said he watched the first plane hit the towers on TV before he went into the classroom of kids. There was NO live coverage of the first plane strike.

He never mixed up things before - very clear confident speaker is George. W.

How on earth did the towers collapse into their footprints at free fall speed

How can you tell it was free fall speed. Just by looking at little YouTUBE videos ? What velocity (terminal) woudl you calculate it should fall at ? Give me a number please.

Building 7 was clearly demolished - how did they plant the charges in such quick time

Because they didn't have time ? And didn't actually mobilise many hundreds of super response secret explosive layers.

Why the record number of forward selling of AA shares on the stock market - 3-4times higher than any point in history. People knew.

It was investigated and no anomilies were found. All trading can be traced. It was traced. Non-story.

Why did the lobby look like a bomb had hit it, when floors just 20 stories below were intact.

From the footage I have seen it looked pretty intact, covered in broken glass. Do you have any images that show it like a bomb has hit it ?

Why did live news feeds interviewing people on the ground, on the day report explosions

Yes, a building that has had 2 planes full of fuel flown into a top speed, ejecting burning debris is silent as it burns and collapses. No unexpected noises at all.

Why did they get rid of all the evidence

Because it wasn't there in the first place - or all the people who got rid of the evidence were in on it. See my above post.

Why no criminal investigation

Against whom exactly ? With what evidence ? References ?

Why did rumsfeld take control of norad, flight training, the frist time in history on the day of the attacks, and make the pilots train in a hijacking scenario, 100's of miles north.

Prove that statement - quotes and actual references please (Not from kiddies "documentaries")

Why would the worlds biggest superpower let airliners go 100's of miles of course without escorting or at worst shooting down. We intercept russian jets within minutes on our scottish borders.

I've seen this quoted many times before. Care to tell me which body in the US monitors internal flight for anomalies and is on stand-by to scramble and shoot down errant planes ? Who works for this Dept. and how is it staffed/funded.

An Address of this organisation would be helpful.

This is ENTIRELY different from the Air Force (RAF/USAF) intercepting Russian flights. I was on a posting in RAF Leuchars in the 80s and flying into British airspace was pretty much an event you could set your watch to. Rules both sides knew. Saw the photos of the Bear pilots waving to the Phantom boys.

Why did Bush stumble over his words when it was suggested inside knowledge of this

I know, unlike him wasn't it.

Why did survivors of the collapse state on TV interviews they witnessed excessive drilling and their offices covered in layers of dust weeks before the collapse

References, transcripts, quotes please - along with source.

Why can explosions clearly be seen at random floors below, before and during the collapse

Yes, why would the masterminds slip up by doing that and exposing their plan ?

How was molten steel dripping from the building (a characteristic of thermite) just before the collapse when the smoke was black, essentially a starved cool fire.

You can positively identify molten steel from from fuzzy YouTUBE clips. And also have first-hand experience of using thermite ?

Was this dutch scientist that found significant amounts of nano termite in the dust sample lying?

Who exactly, names and references please. What is his scientific background and what is he doing now ?

The photo evidence shows steel beams cut at 45 degrees, something that suggests a thermite charge as it allows the building to fall in on itself.

Please show us the photo evidence, who took it, where and when.

How did they manage to find a passport of a hijacker at ground zero when everything else was turned to dust

Those masterminds went a bit far planting that, didn't they ? Slipped up with all the paper that fell on the streets immediately afterwards too ... rather than turning to dust.

Larry Silverstein had even admitted on TV he made the decision to "pull" WTC7 which is a term for blow it up.

He was also quoted as saying "pull it", when told a fire team was in danger due to the building being unstable. Pick which ever interpretation you think fits.

He also admitted renegotiating an insurance deal which would cover him for acts of terrorism just months before this happened.

How many of us have renewed our car insurnace just months before our cars are stolen or wrecked ? Unheard of, eh ?

He also admitted the towers are inefficient in design, costing hundreds of millions a year just for the window cleaning contract.

Window cleaning ......

I could go on

But all these questions bug me, i want to know the truth and no body can answer them sufficiently to satisfy me.

[briers]

Originally Posted by xenon

Which people? I guess you're implying those invloved in the cover up.

Are you seriously suggesting that the people who "knew" in advance, at the very highest echelons of government and secret service, then thought "I know, I'll feather my nest whilst am at it" and dumped thousands of shares in AA?

I suspect that this, like the other questions, can be answered satisfactorily and probably have been if you look properly.

Re. Bush talking about the first plane hitting the towers BEFORE seeing the children I'd like to see footage of that.

Yes, controversially, that is what i am suggesting. People knew, even the UK government told the USA of an impending attack, picked up on their security radar.

http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html

Quite convenient that Bush also sits on the board of a Defence company with several other senate members. Now that maybe a coincidence... maybe.

[Dave_3]

Originally Posted by briers

Yes, controversially, that is what i am suggesting. People knew, even the UK government told the USA of an impending attack, picked up on their security radar.

You were party to the confidential reports from the intelligence services were you ? Could you quote exactly what was reported at the time, how it was reported and what relative weighting they put on those threats, and what level of general activity/threats existed at the time ?

So, even with the intelligence services picking up information of an attack (or was it again, "People" organising this chatter ? I'll have to add those to my list .... ), the Masterminds still went ahead with the plan. Cunning double bluff. Because if the masterminds can make planes dissappear, making reports go missing would be a walk in the park.

D.

[iamjim]

Mossad were behind these attacks. Israel is sitting in a Middle Eastern hot bed; the conflict history goes on well before the Second World War well into the Templar knight’s era (holy land etc.).

Israel at this time in September 2001 was in grave danger of being invaded by perhaps Iraq maybe Iran, Egypt etc... The Israel government sure know how to piss of their neighbours.

What better way to get sympathy for Israel than blow up some towers kill a load of people make it look like terrorists and conveniently blame Afghanistan terrorists (al Qaeda) or Iraq (Saddam Hussein funded terrorists)or just perhaps Islam in general. Does the bush family have a grudge to pay back to Sadam – finish Iraq once and for all… Has anyone looked closely into the Bush family’s company dealings etc. – they are involved in weapon manufacturing too. Strange isn’t it that war = money.

Back on point - Send in the US of A and sort out and protect Israel’s interests in the Middle East.

Did the USA of find out after the attacks that Israel was the source of this? Was the USA government too late in finding out even after their troops had killed loads of innocent people in Afghanistan and Iraq? Just too late? Probably or it could have been a joint planned operation between Israel and USA (coalition forces) to win… wait for it “Hearts and Minds” in the West.

Does this perhaps also mirror the 7/7 attacks in London – yeah lots of conspiracy there too.

One big cover-up - yes it is.

[Tippo]

Originally Posted by Neversaydie

Mossad were behind these attacks. Israel is sitting in a Middle Eastern hot bed; the conflict history goes on well before the Second World War well into the Templar knight’s era (holy land etc.).

Israel at this time in September 2001 was in grave danger of being invaded by perhaps Iraq maybe Iran, Egypt etc... The Israel government sure know how to piss of their neighbours.

What better way to get sympathy for Israel than blow up some towers kill a load of people make it look like terrorists and conveniently blame Afghanistan terrorists (al Qaeda) or Iraq (Saddam Hussein funded terrorists)or just perhaps Islam in general. Does the bush family have a grudge to pay back to Sadam – finish Iraq once and for all… Has anyone looked closely into the Bush family’s company dealings etc. – they are involved in weapon manufacturing too. Strange isn’t it that war = money.

Back on point - Send in the US of A and sort out and protect Israel’s interests in the Middle East.

Did the USA of find out after the attacks that Israel was the source of this? Was the USA government too late in finding out even after their troops had killed loads of innocent people in Afghanistan and Iraq? Just too late? Probably or it could have been a joint planned operation between Israel and USA (coalition forces) to win… wait for it “Hearts and Minds” in the West.

Does this perhaps also mirror the 7/7 attacks in London – yeah lots of conspiracy there too.

One big cover-up - yes it is.

Sorry mate the fact that the 1970's Soviet backed Iranian Nuclear plant is now finally online means that Israel's problems do not directly lie with Islamic terrorism, which was always aimed at the Western 'crusaders' as such, ie. USA. IMHO if Mossad were involved then the same thing would have happened to the Kremlin A LONG TIME AGO. Now Iran HAS nuclear power then perhaps Mossad is not the all-powerful thing it used to be........IMHO get real.

Like I said before I have experienced internal US flights before 2001 and believe me you could get away with a lot. Perhaps the sheer 'terror' of this event may force some people to ask questions about it's authenticity but tragically enough someone being able to hijack and then use a jet plane as a weapon within the US continnental airspace at the time is a valid scenario.

[iamjim]

Originally Posted by Tippo

Sorry mate the fact that the 1970's Soviet backed Iranian Nuclear plant is now finally online means that Israel's problems do not directly lie with Islamic terrorism, which was always aimed at the Western 'crusaders' as such, ie. USA. IMHO if Mossad were involved then the same thing would have happened to the Kremlin A LONG TIME AGO. Now Iran HAS nuclear power then perhaps Mossad is not the all-powerful thing it used to be........IMHO get real.

Like I said before I have experienced internal US flights before 2001 and believe me you could get away with a lot. Perhaps the sheer 'terror' of this event may force some people to ask questions about it's authenticity but tragically enough someone being able to hijack and then use a jet plane as a weapon within the US continnental airspace at the time is a valid scenario.

Really?! So on your basis (your opening paragraph) because they (Mossad) couldnt stop one plight that means they could stop (or indeed start) another?

There is an epicenter, a catalyst and that is all about Israel.

[iamjim]

[iamjim]

[briers]

Originally Posted by Dave_3

You were party to the confidential reports from the intelligence services were you ? Could you quote exactly what was reported at the time, how it was reported and what relative weighting they put on those threats, and what level of general activity/threats existed at the time ?

So, even with the intelligence services picking up information of an attack (or was it again, "People" organising this chatter ? I'll have to add those to my list .... ), the Masterminds still went ahead with the plan. Cunning double bluff. Because if the masterminds can make planes dissappear, making reports go missing would be a walk in the park.

D.

You can continue to belittle me and try to make me look stupid but please don't ignore the video evidence of the collapse.

You can see the collapse taking between 12 and 15 seconds. Loose change claiming 10 on their video but i think thats a bit neat. Look at all the news footage for an impartial timing.

In a vacuum the towers would fall without resistance (free fall) in around 9.5seconds. Of course that isn't possible as there is air resistance. So this 9.5 seconds free increases.

Even when working out the velocity of the falling floors onto each other at the most efficient collapse rate it isn't possible for it to collapse WITH resistance in 15 seconds. Even 20 seconds.

The buildings fell in 15 seconds which just isn't possible unless the resistance has been reduced or removed. The structure was clearly intact right up to the point of collapse. There was no fires lower down therefore the lower 3/4 of the towers should have had full structural integrity.

Forgetting the noise, there is no way those buildings could have collapsed using the official theory of pancaking in the time recorded on the videos.

[Tippo]

Originally Posted by Neversaydie

Really?! So on your basis (your opening paragraph) because they (Mossad) couldnt stop one plight that means they could stop (or indeed start) another?

There is an epicenter, a catalyst and that is all about Israel.

No my point is why would they bother starting another plight when Iran is clearly more of a threat to them than the terrorists themselves. Why bother forcing us to go after the terrorists themselves when it is obvious that Iran funds these groups who at the same time gains the capacity for nuclear power. Just does not make sense to me. Then again none of these conspiracy theories do.

[Dave_3]

Not my aim to personally belittle anyone. Your facts don't belittle me, why should mine affect you in any other way ? Point, and counter-point.

Originally Posted by briers

Even when working out the velocity of the falling floors onto each other at the most efficient collapse rate it isn't possible for it to collapse WITH resistance in 15 seconds. Even 20 seconds.

The buildings fell in 15 seconds which just isn't possible unless the resistance has been reduced or removed. The structure was clearly intact right up to the point of collapse. There was no fires lower down therefore the lower 3/4 of the towers should have had full structural integrity.

Forgetting the noise, there is no way those buildings could have collapsed using the official theory of pancaking in the time recorded on the videos.

How can you quantify the resistance that the floors offered, to be able to say it was, or was not, a factor in the speed of collapse ? What technical background do you have in detonating and collapsing buildings ?

Can you begin to fathom the forces acting on the lower parts of the building with an accelerating and increasing mass of falling debris of the entire upper (and then consectutive) floors shock loading each floor on the way down, and the orders of magnitude difference between applied downward force of the entire falling mass and resistance of office/cubicle walls ? Did you see the plane slow when it crashed its way into the building due to resistance ?

Do you have any calculations that would show how much resistance you would expect, and how you would remove this resistance, and exactly how many floors you would need to destroy with explosives (you hint at it needing all floors weakened) ? Given that you cannot be certain where exactly your missile carrying planes will hit - and if your carefully placed explosives could even be detonated after a plane fireball crashed into them.

Or as Simon explained earlier that the central core was the main support, which carried all the stairwells filled with firemen and fleeing people - you started weakening that with explosives ? Some of that core did remain and saved people inside.

The buildings did collapse - if not by pancaking as you suggest (although we all saw it) - HOW ? To painstakingly carry out many small concealed explosions with hidden explosives detonated in a staggered manner over the time after the plane crashes resulting in "steel beams cut at 45 degrees, something that suggests a thermite charge as it allows the building to fall in on itself", and getting it so that no wave of final detonations is required/seen to get BOTH towers to collapse starting from only the top seems far fetched. Why not let the building fall outwards and cause more mayhem ?

In fact ... why conceal that you used explosives at all ? Just blow them up from the base without hijacking planes - as was attenpted before ? Why go to all the elaborate palaver of hidden explosives and hijacked planes ?

I can't believe it was because Larry Silverstein had been given the nod by the masterminds about the upcoming devestation and horrendous loss of life in his buildings, so he could renew his insurance and not worry about spending so much money cleaning dirty windows. Excuse me being so facetious, but it risible.

D.

[willhollin]

What's all this about World Trade Center?

[iamjim]

Originally Posted by Tippo

No my point is why would they bother starting another plight when Iran is clearly more of a threat to them than the terrorists themselves. Why bother forcing us to go after the terrorists themselves when it is obvious that Iran funds these groups who at the same time gains the capacity for nuclear power. Just does not make sense to me. Then again none of these conspiracy theories do.

Are we not awaiting another reason to go to war against Iran?

Watch this space... something is gonna happen that will give cause to go to Iran. Oh wait it just has - nuclear threat... Ticking time bomb. I think involved powers are playing a game and one that involved watching the nuclear issue in Iran just unfold in the public domain.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by Dave_3

Still open-jawed at the way "documentaries" made in bedrooms by kids using YouTUBE and Google, and 3rd person reports are clung to as solid fact. In the "fog of war" statements are passed along and grow legs - you can clearly see it in the amatuer footage as rumours are spreading like wild fire.

Dave - to be honest I am also genuinely surprised at this. I had no idea how many normal people are prepared to believe this stuff.

As someone with a fair knowledge of building structures, including some experience of tower construction it totally baffles me that anyone would think that simultaneous controlled demolition of 2 110 storey buildings, starting from the top down, which would require charges at the majority of structural columns on EVERY floor below the impact zone, is more plausible than structural collapse.

Even worse, the complexities of somehow combining this with secret staged plane strikes, missiles and timed explosive charges beggars belief.

For instance, the conspiracy guys seem exited about Larry Silversteins statement, but do you honestly think someone in on a secret 'false flag' attack on US Civilians would accidently confess in a TV interview????

Then all this stuff about the use of a non-passenger plane. Surely, if the mystery black ops people had gone to all this trouble, they would have been able to track down and use a passenger plane, rather than risk anyone noticing that there were no windows????

Originally Posted by Dave_3

Can you begin to fathom the forces acting on the lower parts of the building with an accelerating and increasing mass of falling debris of the entire upper (and then consectutive) floors shock loading each floor on the way down, and the orders of magnitude difference between applied downward force of the entire falling mass and resistance of office/cubicle walls ? Did you see the plane slow when it crashed its way into the building due to resistance ?

Do you have any calculations that would show how much resistance you would expect, and how you would remove this resistance, and exactly how many floors you would need to destroy with explosives (you hint at it needing all floors weakened) ? Given that you cannot be certain where exactly your missile carrying planes will hit - and if your carefully placed explosives could even be detonated after a plane fireball crashed into them.

Or as Simon explained earlier that the central core was the main support, which carried all the stairwells filled with firemen and fleeing people - you started weakening that with explosives ? Some of that core did remain and saved people inside.

The buildings did collapse - if not by pancaking as you suggest (although we all saw it) - HOW ? To painstakingly carry out many small concealed explosions with hidden explosives detonated in a staggered manner over the time after the plane crashes resulting in "steel beams cut at 45 degrees, something that suggests a thermite charge as it allows the building to fall in on itself", and getting it so that no wave of final detonations is required/seen to get BOTH towers to collapse starting from only the top seems far fetched. Why not let the building fall outwards and cause more mayhem ?

In fact ... why conceal that you used explosives at all ? Just blow them up from the base without hijacking planes - as was attenpted before ? Why go to all the elaborate palaver of hidden explosives and hijacked planes ?

I can't believe it was because Larry Silverstein had been given the nod by the masterminds about the upcoming devestation and horrendous loss of life in his buildings, so he could renew his insurance and not worry about spending so much money cleaning dirty windows. Excuse me being so facetious, but it risible.

D.

Actually, the best reports on the collapse don't suggest that the floors 'pancaked'. The more plausible explanation is that the upper floors, above the impact zone acted as a massive piledriver and literally fell straight through the lower floors demolishing everything in their path. This neatly takes care of all the arguments about the speed of the collapse etc and (to me) makes absolute sense.

Conspiracy buffs have questioned the way the towers collapsed neatly in on themselves and this seems to be the thing that sets people off on ideas of controlled demolition with explosives. But if you think about it, the mass of the falling upper floors would be immense. You would need huge forces to stop it doing anything other than falling straight through the lower floors.

It's also worth thinking about the perimeter steels that can be seen in many of the photographs. The external walls were effectively a massive steel cage, which would have done a very good job of retaining falling debris and directing it straight down.

As you have said, if it was a set up, they did it in an incredibly difficult way. You would need a simply mind boggling amount of explosive to blow up a 110 storey building floor by floor from the top down. Expecially one with a perimeter wall constuction like this one.

Imagine the effort taken to pop each charge in perfectly synchronised order so that the tower dropped at free fall speed?

As to comparisons with other towers, people just dont seem able to grasp the scale of these buildings and the incredible forces and mass involved.

Imagine that you could make a pile of 20 houses. Then drop them 100 ft onto another house. Do you think they would simply bounce off, or would the house at the bottom be completely obliterated?