quote:

ORIGINAL: rachel529

i usually bite my tongue on this topic, as no one convinces anyone of anything.  but my two cents :D

where we should focus our attention is on the pentagon hit.  when asked about the lack of wreckage we were told that the flames burnt so hot it vaporised the plane.  but-   kerosene can not burn hot enough to melt aircraft aluminum.  it is incapable of burning that hot.  so there is some sort of coverup.  cant argue with that.  as to what is being covered up?  we will never know

quote:

ORIGINAL: rachel529

i usually bite my tongue on this topic, as no one convinces anyone of anything.  but my two cents :D

where we should focus our attention is on the pentagon hit.  when asked about the lack of wreckage we were told that the flames burnt so hot it vaporised the plane.  but-   kerosene can not burn hot enough to melt aircraft aluminum.  it is incapable of burning that hot.  so there is some sort of coverup.  cant argue with that.  as to what is being covered up?  we will never know

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: rachel529

i usually bite my tongue on this topic, as no one convinces anyone of anything.  but my two cents :D

where we should focus our attention is on the pentagon hit.  when asked about the lack of wreckage we were told that the flames burnt so hot it vaporised the plane.  but-   kerosene can not burn hot enough to melt aircraft aluminum.  it is incapable of burning that hot.  so there is some sort of coverup.  cant argue with that.  as to what is being covered up?  we will never know

Well seeing as a Boeing 757 is made of light weight materials (including aluminum alloys and epoxy composites), one could reasonably assume that the fire created by the jet fuel (which burns at temps between 800 and 1500 degrees F), would be hot enough to vaporize most of the plane.

But who am I to try and debunk the truthers, at least this keeps em busy and typically in one place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rachel529

i usually bite my tongue on this topic, as no one convinces anyone of anything.  but my two cents :D

where we should focus our attention is on the pentagon hit.  when asked about the lack of wreckage we were told that the flames burnt so hot it vaporised the plane.  but-   kerosene can not burn hot enough to melt aircraft aluminum.  it is incapable of burning that hot.  so there is some sort of coverup.  cant argue with that.  as to what is being covered up?  we will never know

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

What has that to do with the Illuminati?  And if government's so incompetent, how could they have carried off a fake 9/11.  You can't have it both ways.

Speaking of Illuminati and the PTB, where are they telling about another 9/11?  What papers, TV, radio, etc.?

Here is my position.

7 was imploded.

while  1 and 2 seem odd- I stop short of saying the govt did that.

but 7 was taken down.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

~ Long Thoughts ~

"All those people! Why Hasn't Anyone Talked?"

I didn't know them all. I knew many. At least a few hundred by face ranging from the servers at 'Windows', security, 'floor wardens', business men and woman ranging from college interns to corporate officers to private business owners. I remember once, soon after 9/11, trying to think of everyone I knew by name; the desert chef at Window who gave me the white chocolate mousse recipe I recreated every Christmas, the security chief who let gave me a tour of the garage where the first attempt to take down the building occurred; but I gave up without generating a number. Now, after all these years, I happier I didn't do as planned and write down those names and memories.

To answer your question RealOne, they haven't talked because they are dead.

I also remember being pissed about forgetting not to be there on 'fire drill' day for my building sector because it meant I had to walk down those steps. I can relate first hand - the only things, beside used chewing gum, painted on any of the exposed beams I saw was graffiti; although maybe thermite paint was used.

I didn't see a plane go into either building, I was on the NJ turnpike. I should have seen them up close and personal from the 97th floor from II; but fate had other plans for me.

The US Supreme Court acknowledges that obscenity is a moving target and each individual, along with each community, has their own standards. There maybe more disgusting, ignorant, threads posted on CM; but to me - this thread is the most obscene I've encountered during my tenure. However I'm sure some of you would consider me, what I do, and what I post similarly.

The memories of people, not only the ones who pass through my thoughts daily, but the ones I didn't meet or know like the people in the planes, are being abused. 'Non-consensually' to use a frequently used CM reference. Silent, they and their families are unable to respond. They are more fortunate than me - to my knowledge they don't frequent CM. I won't embarrass myself to attempt to speak for them. I speak for myself, my experience, my memories, my guilt for doing nothing more than surviving.

There is a benefit to growing old. I'm actually grateful for the pragmatic truth that as each day goes by, I remember less. Unfortunately, I still remember too much to not react emotionally to the nonsense being expressed.

However its your right and obviously CM's policy permits you to go ahead - post away. I won't bother you again with my perspective, which I'm sure you consider too personally involved to consider or reflective of accuracy. I've yet to be able to get through any of the 'scientific' evidence provided by either side of the argument. I admit, on the 'science' side of this debate, I speak from a position of ignorance.

I also admit, as a hope, like the people whose names I've forgotten so too will this thread be as my representative image of CM's political threads, when it's not on the first page.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

I've lost track of the number of times I sent you the report on WTC 7.  It had major structural damage from the debris (2 holes each 10 stories long), and had multiple fires burning.  I even had the quotes from the fire chief at the scene, who decried all the conspiracy theories.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

What has that to do with the Illuminati?  And if government's so incompetent, how could they have carried off a fake 9/11.  You can't have it both ways.

Speaking of Illuminati and the PTB, where are they telling about another 9/11?  What papers, TV, radio, etc.?

Here is my position.

7 was imploded.

while  1 and 2 seem odd- I stop short of saying the govt did that.

but 7 was taken down.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

Main engine, found at  Pentagon crash site...

quote:

ORIGINAL: rachel529

first off, aluminum has like double the melt temp that kerosene can attain-  i just checked on google.  second, that tiny little round thingy is all thats left from a 10 foot steel engine?  cmon now...  and since you want to argue-  how come the nose of the plane made a big hole(the weakest part structurally)  and the engines did not(the hardest part)?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy
Speaking of Illuminati and the PTB, where are they telling about another 9/11?  What papers, TV, radio, etc.?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

There WAS wreckage in the Pentagon.  I posted that back aways, to Realone.

The plane clipped trees and lightposts just before it hit the building, and there were eyewitness reports of the plane hitting it.  The video of it doesn't show the entire flight path because it was a security camera and they don't record full video, they record short bursts every few seconds.

The plane hit the newly reinforced section of the Pentagon, and hitting a structure like that at high speed would shatter that plane to bits.

Here are pictures and some analysis by www.aerospaceweb.org

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml