An alternative thought on events (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Aneirin -> An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 3:48:27 PM)

Has anyone seen this video?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501

Any thoughts on it's content?



JackM1 -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 4:52:34 PM)

ive seen this before, and some of their theories are so crazy and unprobable that its hard to imagine where they came up with them. also, they are really stretching the information they have. example; the steal frame buldings collapsing. they say that other buildings of the same build didnt collapse because of fires they experienced, but i would like to point out that those buildings were much smaller, and that these buildings had JET LINERS smash into them..you know, those HUGE fucking planes? full of jet fuel? not only did that cause massive structural damage, but the jet fuel made the fire burn hot enough, FAST enough, to cause the butresses to weaken and eventually collapse. theyre trying to pull straws out of their hats, by using "statistics" and "facts", but each situation is different, and theres no telling what kind of damage these buildings actually sustained when they were hit. its not like we coudl SEE anything. my theory, personally, is that despite the second building being hit last, the way that the plane came in, hitting it on the side, could have weakened the structure, causing more pressure to be put onto the steal frame which made it tip and eventualy break. the other building, though hit first, was hit head on, and might have had more stability because it wasnt damaged a great deal more to one side than the other. also, on the topic of how fast these buildings came down, there was a MASSIVE amount of weight being thrust down from these buildings; i believe that these were the first steal frame buildings to come down because of fire, but also remember that they are the tallest. its not that hard to imagine all of that weight gaining momentum as it came crashing down.

all in all, it pisses me off....why are people so bent on trying to make this the american governments fault, somehow? a crazy sociopath had his lankies get into the country, learn how to fly planes, and then hijack two of the biggest, fully loaded, and slam them into one of the most prominent structures of a major city. we didnt really have any problems with them BEFORE that, and this war is, quite frankly, just a strain on the economy and i cant imagine why anyone would think the goverment wanted an excuse to go blow another country up. ESPECIALLY when there iss someone who took full(prideful) responsability for the attack.



Level -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 4:56:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

Has anyone seen this video?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501

Any thoughts on it's content?


If the contents could be made into toilet paper, then it would have some value.....



Level -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 4:58:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JackM1

why are people so bent on trying to make this the american governments fault, somehow?


Self-loathing, and hatred of America, for some.



popeye1250 -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 4:58:40 PM)

I agree, it sounds too preposterous, just like the global warming people or those who claim to have been kidnapped by "grays" from UFOs.
And if a rocket crashed into the Pentagon where are all those people who were aboard the plane?
Yup, Bin Laden did claim responsibility.



Rule -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 6:23:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JackM1
these buildings had JET LINERS smash into them
And you know this how? Are you one of those elusive eye-witnesses that verily saw those two airplanes crash into those buildings with your very own eyes? Or did you see some phony computer generated movie production?
 
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: JackM1
a crazy sociopath had his lankies get into the country, learn how to fly planes, and then hijack two of the biggest, fully loaded, and slam them into one of the most prominent structures of a major city.
Ridiculous, isn't it? Yes, it is.
 
And El Qaeda was financed by the CIA and the relatives of Bin have tea with the Bushes.



HaveRopeWillBind -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 8:18:34 PM)

PBS had a really good analysis of the tower collapses a few years ago called, "Why the Towers Fell." It included interviews with the original designer and structural engineer as well as those investigating the aftermath. Essentially the original impact of the aircraft blew the insulating material off the steel structure. This allowed the floor beams to heat sufficiently that they drooped downward and sheared the mounting bolts that attached them to the vertical beams. That allowed the beam structure to bow outward to the point that they finally sheared and let go. Once the initial collapse occurred the weight of the falling structure from above subsequently overloaded each floor below causing sequential failure. This is why they fell vertically and didn't fall off to one side.

Had a more robust form of fireproofing been coating the beams there is a very good chance the towers would still stand and would have been repaired long ago. The type used was sprayed on as the structure went up. It was a foam type insulator that worked well in a normal fire situation but it was not anticipated that such a violent impact would remove the foam from the metal. Better insulation on the steel structure or more robust floor beam connections would have made the difference.

Additionally better fire protection around the central core where the elevators and escape stairs were located would have allowed more of the people in the upper floors to escape. As designed, the only protection for the central core was thick sheetrock wallboards. Not a material that stands up to impact.



Bufotenin -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 8:35:58 PM)

People insist on believing it was the government's doing because they want, even need to believe that the government and CIA are all-powerful. If they accept that the CIA, FBI, etc. are bureaucratic clusterfucks run by fallible people incapable of stopping something like the World Trade Center bombings from happening right under their noses, then they'd have to accept the fact that maybe they aren't privy to some sort of secret knowledge and maybe the world isn't as simple as 'Rich white people/Jews are behind everything bad thing that ever happens'.  



Rule -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 8:37:50 PM)

There were no airplanes. So how did the foam get "blown off" the steel structure?
 
Anyway those fires were insignificant. Even if the towers had been erected with no insulation at all nothing would have happened.



Bufotenin -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 8:41:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

There were no airplanes. So how did the foam get "blown off" the steel structure?
 
Anyway those fires were insignificant. Even if the towers had been erected with no insulation at all nothing would have happened.


There were no Twin Towers. How could the government blow up the World Trade Center when there was nothing there but giant holograms?

Oh, the deception!



Rule -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 8:42:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bufotenin
the CIA, FBI, etc. are bureaucratic clusterfucks run by fallible people incapable of stopping something like the World Trade Center bombings from happening right under their noses
So they are a waste of taxpayer money. Abolishing them then is a ticket to become president of the USA. For some odd reason I suspect that anyone that tries to run for president on such a ticket will die in an unfortunate accident.



Bufotenin -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 8:45:47 PM)

Thank you for illustrating my point.



Rule -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 8:45:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bufotenin
There were no Twin Towers. How could the government blow up the World Trade Center when there was nothing there but giant holograms?

That is nonsense. A friend of mine who is a credible witness stood on top of one of those "holograms" the day before they collapsed.
 
On the other hand there are no credible witnesses that saw either of those planes fly into one of the towers.



Bufotenin -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 8:48:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bufotenin
There were no Twin Towers. How could the government blow up the World Trade Center when there was nothing there but giant holograms?

That is nonsense. A friend of mine who is a credible witness stood on top of one of those "holograms" the day before they collapsed.
 
On the other hand there are no credible witnesses that saw either of those planes fly into one of the towers.


Your friend is not a credible witness. They were holograms and your friend is a CIA puppet.



Rule -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 9:00:42 PM)

Are not you that sage that has proven that the Moon is a Swiss Cheese?



Bufotenin -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 9:05:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

Are not you that sage that has proven that the Moon is a Swiss Cheese?


Are you not that paranoid guy who hasn't proven that the World Trade Center wasn't destroyed by hijacked passenger jets?



Rule -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 9:13:03 PM)

.



HaveRopeWillBind -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 10:10:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

There were no airplanes. So how did the foam get "blown off" the steel structure?

 
As it happened when I got home from work on 9/11/01 I put tapes in 3 different videotape decks and set one each to record the NBC, CBS, and ABC coverage on the evening news. Coverage was extended and all other programming canceled that day until well into the night. There were a number of videos from various sources and various angles that all showed aircraft hitting the towers. I doubt seriously that anyone could have created that many false tapes that also included crowd reaction and reporter comments, etc. I feel pretty confident that the towers were indeed hit by airliners. If we didn't have such a secrecy oriented administration I think a lot of these conspiracy theories would have run their course long ago.

 
quote:


Anyway those fires were insignificant. Even if the towers had been erected with no insulation at all nothing would have happened.


Fire is never insignificant. Every piece of metal you have ever owned was at one time melted or formed by fire. No one will ever know exactly what the fire conditions were at the hottest parts of the fire, but being 78 floors up with holes in the sides of the buildings and the usual onshore breezes coming off the ocean in that area I would guess that there was enough airflow into the fires to act like a bellows in a blacksmith's forge and create hotter than usual fire conditions.



UtopianRanger -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/26/2007 10:37:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

Has anyone seen this video?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501

Any thoughts on it's content?



Aneirin  :

Be very careful......

I sense Dick Cheney, the vice president, in the reading/posting audience.



 - R



Rule -> RE: An alternative thought on events (10/27/2007 2:38:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HaveRopeWillBind
when I got home from work on 9/11/01 I put tapes in 3 different videotape decks and set one each to record the NBC, CBS, and ABC coverage on the evening news. Coverage was extended and all other programming canceled that day until well into the night. There were a number of videos from various sources and various angles that all showed aircraft hitting the towers.
Original copies. Well done. Have you already converted them to digital data? You ought to, you know. Broadcasting companies cannot be trusted with these data. The BBC destroyed two thirds of its broadcasted recordings of those days. Also they may be altered and edited after having been broadcast, so original copies are important.
 
In any case, if I recall correctly, the second movie of an airplane hitting one of the towers became available only the day after the alleged attacks.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: HaveRopeWillBind
I doubt seriously that anyone could have created that many false tapes that also included crowd reaction and reporter comments, etc.

There are a lot of people that claim to have witnessed the airplanes involved in the Pentagon incident. They all lied. You trust those reporters? They are suspect. Crowd reaction? What crowd? Why díd not any of those crowd step forward and claim his Ah or shriek in these movies? A crowd of actors it was. They are all suspect. There are no credible eye-witnesses; I have not been able to find any. You seriously doubt? Go to the cinema and look at the crowds in the movies - much larger crowds these often are too. You think those crowds in the movies are not actors?
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: HaveRopeWillBind
I feel pretty confident that the towers were indeed hit by airliners.

I have studied much data, also benefitted from the research of others, walked though the spectrum of hypotheses, and finally at long length arrived at my conclusion: they were not. This is not merely the opinion of an ordinary human or even a mere genius. I am the one eyed man in the country of the blind.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: HaveRopeWillBind
No one will ever know exactly what the fire conditions were at the hottest parts of the fire
We have discussed those temperatures before in this forum. If I recall correctly, I finally thought 230 degrees Celcius most likely for the slight of hand distraction fires. The thermate fires that were ignited moments before the collapse of course were much hotter.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875