RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE

RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 10:23:32 AM)
you go fuck yourself. lets talk about your money.........how much did your house cost? what are your payments? how much silver do you have at what price, how much gold? what do you have for assets? and then tell me what something cost me has to do with this, and I might reciprocate.

pahunkboy -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 10:30:24 AM)
...

pahunkboy -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 10:52:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy Anyone accounted for the fact that there are a lot of common names in the Arab world? What proof do these guys have that the hijackers are alive. All this source does is state it with no proof. You might have even seen him at the donut shop.

thornhappy -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 11:15:58 AM)
In other words, you have no clue.

stef -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 11:27:13 AM)
Real0ne, Rule and Hunky, this is a plea to all of you. [img]http://www.inertdomain.com/images/meds.jpg[/img] Before it's too late. ~stef

Politesub53 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 1:35:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule I do not want to convince you or anyone. I now know nearly everything about 911, or at least sufficient. (I am still wondering how that one keystone pillar in WTC7 was brought down or weakened, as an ordinary explosive has been ruled out as too noisy.) What happens if I make known what I - using internet sources, so anyone can do the same - discovered, besides me being murdered within two days? This hoax was a pretext for war. I disapprove of the hoax and I disapprove of the ruthlessness, but I am not so sure that I disapprove of the wars. If I talk, the western, allied countries may have to pay heavy damages. In my estimation, though, the wars will fail; Jews (and in my opinion Muslims are Jews) will resist any pressure to change their culture. The Greek Maccabees tried it and failed, the Romans tried it and failed, Mohammed and his Arabs tried it and failed (and instead were themselves converted to the Jewish religion), the Crusaders tried it and failed. Only in Spain and Portugal were the Muslims ever defeated and converted - but even that was not a complete success, as the Marans (converted Jews and Muslims) persisted in their Jewish customs. Absurdity at its finest.

Politesub53 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 1:50:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy well it is awfully convenient that now America has YOUR UK war on terror. The Irish had no problem with those in America. Now everyone is a terrorist. Not everyone wants to be London or Tel Iviv. So 7 gets massive AIG money which we bailed out 2x- and cattle have to take shoes off at the airport. And not walk thru naked body scanner cancer machines. We should have stayed broken off of Old Europe. We will dump the current monetary system, and move toward a constitutional credit system. How is Ireland linked with Iraq, your logic is bewildering at best, more so in this post.

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 6:18:17 PM)
DEMOLITION VERSUS COLLAPSE See the difference.... [image]local://upfiles/59055/08909AF90AF8465C9D61ABF4BD1914BB.jpg[/image]

pahunkboy -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 6:36:48 PM)
http://www.roguegovernment.com/Iran%27s_Ahmadinejad%3A_Sept._11_attacks_a_%27big_lie%27/19866/0/7/7/Y/M.html

rulemylife -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 6:43:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy http://www.roguegovernment.com/Iran%27s_Ahmadinejad%3A_Sept._11_attacks_a_%27big_lie%27/19866/0/7/7/Y/M.html Yeah, you guys are in good company. Nothing like having Iran's President on your side to boost your credibility.

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 7:26:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy http://www.roguegovernment.com/Iran%27s_Ahmadinejad%3A_Sept._11_attacks_a_%27big_lie%27/19866/0/7/7/Y/M.html Yeah, you guys are in good company. Nothing like having Iran's President on your side to boost your credibility. yeh you could have dubya or obahahaha they are really incredible!

Real0ne -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 7:39:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail again, none you are full of shit, no, I have repeatedly said that the lower floors were heavier construction, ok then the whole thing should have pancaked in the experiment because they were all the fucking same! BLAM shot yourself in the fucking foot again and you have ducked the conservation of energy reference, No I didnt that was why I posted that kool science demonstration. It was for those who did not have any advanced physics background to show them how fucking impossible your loony claims are. and the columns failing with some 100 floors dropping on them is not paper and washers. Right it was really fucking stron steel ron not paper I agree! and again, there is nothing that washers and paper show. Ron did you graduate fucking high school already? It demonstrates the law of conservation of energy. It didnt even make it a 1/3rd of the way down even though they were dropped the equivalent of 20 stories before impact not just one fucking floor like the wtc. Yeh ron fucking paper holding up thosese big assed steel washers and they DID NOT COLLAPSE get it? there is no proportion there is no scale in weight, structure torsion, tension, nothing........... The sure there is, just enough to hold up the washers. He posted how to make it if you want email him and tell him how fucked up he is.... good luck with that. if I take a sheet of wet toilet paper and drop lead blocks thru it, it will fall to the floor......ergo id est, I have proven that your washer video is a fake.....just as reasonable. you are right in there for retard of the montnth with that line. Hell if I piss on your face you will close your eyes too. But then wht fuck does that have with the experiment. Lead through wet toilet paper what a bankrupt maroon. regarding your other video of the demolition and the tower tipping over, it was done from the base down, and was nothing like the wtc collapse, of which both videos prove my point entirely. Do you like look at everything in life through a fucking mirror that you manage to get everything damn thing backwards like you do? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caATBZEKL4c&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbauH-mvmDw big bodda fucka boom! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVQaVgJne6c and another http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syzKBBB_THE and another http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ1E2NPl-s8

MrRodgers -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 9:32:19 PM)
They are reasoning upon no more than HS physics and there should have been a grand jury for 9/11...on 9/12. There are a whole lot more people than these, that have wanted a grand jury for some 8-9 yrs....a whole lot more people. As I've written, 9/11 is so obviously a false-flag operation it begs out at us...not to disbelieve the government's story.

MrRodgers -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 9:51:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne See the difference.... Still pictures prove nothing. Think about this at what is described as a comparative analysis...does a single 60 ton aircraft take down by any means, more steel...then in the largest battleships ? No.

thornhappy -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 9:55:31 PM)
It doesn't have to.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 9:56:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne See the difference.... Still pictures prove nothing. Think about this at what is described as a comparative analysis...does a single 60 ton aircraft take down by any means, more steel...then in the largest battleships ? No. Of course. Some of your colleagues in this ridiculous conspiracy crap claim it was a missile, and a missile is a lot smaller than an airplane. You guys just make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Every time you throw some silly-assed thing like this out there, it contradicts at least three other silly-assed things one of you threw out earlier, and it never occurs to you guys how completely contradictory and asinine your positions become the more you twist in circles like that. Is there anything at all that's too crazy even for you guys to believe? Anything?

MrMister -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 10:36:33 PM)
Math and Science and Engineering and Data beats Hysteria and Conjecture and Sound and Fury (signifying nothing). Speaking as a general contractor, with an extensive background in structural engineering, I initially thought as many have expressed here. Building 7 caught fire when the Towers fell, it continued to burn with firefighters inside until they were pulled out about 3:30PM. Big gash down the side of Building 7 from the fall of WTC. Building 7 fell about 5:15PM. Fire, weakened structures bending outwards, floors pulling off the steel connections with typical pancaking. Force=mass x acceleration. Do the numbers, with yield strength of heated steel and the annealing (softening) process that occurs after steel is heated. It seemed all pretty simple at first. No explosives, no magic, just internals burning without the benefit of water pressure to run the sprinklers. If you wanted a conspiracy theory, I thought we should have asked why the sprinklers on the WTC did not put out the fire... oh, yes, they were not designed with sufficient coverage density to abate thousands of gallons of burning jet fuel. Simple math. Out of the design parameters. It seemed pretty obvious that as long as we are designing closer and closer to the strength limits of materials, and making more and more assumptions to get costs down, particularly when extreme situations occur, structures will fail. The math of statics and dynamics and strength of materials generally tells it all. After considering a multitude of data that came out regarding a Momentum Transfer Analysis of the collapse of the upper storeys of WTC1. I then began some digging into the information available about all the molten metal on site for months afterward. And then recalling that the World Trade Center buildings were not built recently--they were built in the 1960s-1970s, and designed to withstand a direct hit from an airplane. (Yes, it was a 707--a smaller plane than the 757 which hit it--but the design parameters were set for a higher airspeed, which meant a higher kinetic energy.) And combined with the NIST data seemed itself to disprove the collapse theories based on fire. Among so many, many other things that indicated something just isn't adding up, I began to doubt the official story. However, I (like so many others) have not undertaken my own definitive study on what happened on 9/11, particularly on the collapse of blg 7, but the questions raised that are out there and some of the data brought into the light (which is abundantly presented in many of the following links I'll give if anyone is so inclined to at the very least look at them) regarding the free-fall collapse were certainly valid enough to at the very least take into consideration that there is something afoul. Fact is, in my mind, there are just too many instances of wrong-doing and/or a cover-up has taken place for any person (capable of critical thinking and analysis) to simply dismiss all the questions and facts that are readily available to anyone who cares to look. Unfortunately, I realize this is a bdsm website and not one generally populated with very many folks with the willingness or the capability to look at all the data, or even click on a few of the links given. But, c'est la vie. It's just the way it is and always will be. http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20100219/pl_usnw/DC57612_1 1,000 Architects & Engineers Call for New 9/11 Investigation PR Newswire Fri Feb 19, 8:00 am ET SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Richard Gage, AIA, architect and founder of the non-profit Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Inc. (AE911Truth), will announce a decisive milestone today at a press conference in San Francisco, as more than 1,000 worldwide architects and engineers now support the call for a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. After careful examination of the official explanation, along with the forensic data omitted from official reports, these professionals have concluded that a new independent investigation into these mysterious collapses is needed. Mr. Gage will deliver the news around this major development, accompanied by signers of the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition. The press conference will be held concurrently in 38 cities in 6 countries. http://www.ae911truth.org/info/160 These prominent architectural and engineering professionals will discuss the organization's findings and concerns. A brief presentation of the explosive evidence they have compiled will be followed by Q & A. The presentation is an important update of "9/11: Blueprint for Truth – The Architecture of Destruction," the DVD produced by the organization, and available on their website AE911Truth.org, which analyzes the scientific forensic evidence concluding that the three skyscrapers in New York City were demolished with explosives on 9/11. The petition will be delivered today to every congressional representative by AE911Truth petition signers throughout the country. Government officials will be notified that "Misprision of Treason", US Code 18 (Sec. 2382), is a serious federal offense which requires those with evidence of treason to act. ...<snip>... Excellent Analysis of the North Tower Exploding. A&E for 9/11 Truth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyoayCU42hM&feature=player_embedded http://militantlibertarian.org/2010/02/16/what-the-new-9-11-photos-show/ What the New 9-11 Photos Show Posted: February 16th, 2010 by Militant Libertarian by Christopher Bollyn Eight and a half years after 9-11, we are finally able to view the photos taken by a photographer in a New York City Police Department helicopter hovering over the scene of the crime. Why has it taken so long for these photos of the crime of the century to be released? What do these newly released photos tell us? There is certainly a great deal of evidence contained in these hundreds of photographs, which will take some time to analyze, but one thing is very clear. The Twin Towers were turned into dust. The concrete and steel frame towers were reduced to immense clouds of dust and this was not caused by the potential energy of the buildings being released as they fell. The towers were pulverized through the use of many tons of super-thermite, which was discovered in the dust by Professor Steven E. Jones. Looking at these photos, one can see that the towers were exploded and turned into dust in the same instant. The photos validate the thesis, now proven, that the Twin Towers – and the lives within them – were destroyed by demolition charges and tons of super-thermite which had been applied to the concrete floors, probably on the undersides of the floor pans. ...<snip>... [The columns and beams also had to have cutter charges on them.] Here is a compendium of authoritative 911 web sites The destruction of our constitution and Bill of Rights, as well as the current ill-advised wars trace to the events of 9/11. If it is true that it was an inside job designed to create a handy crisis for those wishing to seize power, we should at least ask, "what if it is true?" Much serious analysis has examined the question, and the answers are disturbing. See: http://www.inteldaily.com/news/172/ARTICLE/10300/2009-04-06.html Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe By Dr. Steven Jones "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and Bradley R. Larsen The paper ends with this sentence: "Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material." In short, the paper explodes the official story that "no evidence" exists for explosive/pyrotechnic materials in the WTC buildings. ...<snip>... Tons of Math and Science and Engineering and Data in many of the following links Journal of 9/11 Studies http://www.journalof911studies.com/ Thank you for visiting The Journal of 9/11 Studies, a peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal, covering the whole of research related to the events of 11 September, 2001. Many fields of study are represented in the journal, including Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Psychology. All content is freely available online. Our mission in the past has been to provide an outlet for evidence-based research into the events of 9/11 that might not otherwise have been published.......... PHYSICS 911 is created and maintained by a group of scientists, engineers and other professionals known collectively as the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-eleven ... http://physics911.net/ See also Video from Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth In the 2008 Edition of this stunning multimedia presentation, filmed professionally in a studio before a live audience, San Francisco Bay Area architect, Richard Gage, AIA, provides the myth-shattering scientific forensic evidence of the explosive controlled demolition of all 3 WTC high-rise buildings on September 11, 2001. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b74naeawdCs&feature=PlayList&p=621A4B03C1169C78&index=0&playnext=1 The video can be watched here, also, along with shorter versions: http://www.ae911truth.org/ The list of architects and engineers is here: http://www.ae911truth.org/signpetition.php Engineers and Architects Question the 9/11 Commission Report http://patriotsquestion911.com/engineers.html Pilots and Aviation Professionals Question the 9/11 Commission Report http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html Professors Question the 9/11 Commission Report http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html Senior Military, Intelligence, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials Question the 9/11 Commission Report http://patriotsquestion911.com/ Highly Credible People Question the 9/11 Commission Report http://www.911blogger.com/node/11094 http://www.911blogger.com/node/11112 http://www.911docs.net/ http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=WOO20100214&articleId=17624 The Media Response to the Growing Influence of the 9/11 Truth Movement. Part II: A Survey of Attitude Change in 2009-2010 by Elizabeth Woodworth DVDs Available For Those Who Question the 9/11 Commission Report http://www.onedollardvdproject.com

MrRodgers -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/6/2010 10:40:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne See the difference.... Still pictures prove nothing. Think about this at what is described as a comparative analysis...does a single 60 ton aircraft take down by any means, more steel...then in the largest battleships ? No. Of course. Some of your colleagues in this ridiculous conspiracy crap claim it was a missile, and a missile is a lot smaller than an airplane. You guys just make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Every time you throw some silly-assed thing like this out there, it contradicts at least three other silly-assed things one of you threw out earlier, and it never occurs to you guys how completely contradictory and asinine your positions become the more you twist in circles like that. Is there anything at all that's too crazy even for you guys to believe? Anything? My questions do not arise out of any others and are to be taken as they are. How about the biggest aircraft carriers ? NO !! There is no 'us guys' I go on HS physics, I go on what I have researched and seen myself just as this petition does. The 'sillyness' is in believing whole cloth out of almost nothing, the govt.'s crazy conspiracy theory and then after the fact...trying to prove it. This is despite massive doubt about every single so-called study done to try and very unsucessfully so...the government's theory. Examining the theory of others does not let the government story...off the hook. They failed in proving their case.

Politesub53 -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/7/2010 4:31:57 AM)
quote: MrMister : The photos validate the thesis, now proven, that the Twin Towers – and the lives within them – were destroyed by demolition charges and tons of super-thermite which had been applied to the concrete floors, probably on the undersides of the floor pans. I have a few questions for you. 1) There was no such thing as super thermite or nanotechnology in explosives, when the wtc was constructed. How did they manage to spray all the undersides of the concrete flooring, without anyone noticing ? 2) If they did manage the above, the central structure would still have remained standing. 3) How did they control the detonation, in the right sequence, to bring down the buildings as you suggest. We both know that a controlled demolition must blast out supporting columns in a set order, If this isnt done, they cant control the direction of the fall. I wont even get into the amount of demolition that takes place by machinery PRIOR to the actual explosion. In this link you can both see and here a sequenced demolition. http://en.sevenload.com/videos/AikkuY6-Inner-City-Demolition 4) Why have none of the demolition workers who installed the charges ever spoken up. I refuse to believe that a large workforce would see thousands of civillians killed, ad not one would decide to blow the whistle.

thornhappy -> RE: WASHINGTON TIMES QUESTIONS WTC 7 COLLAPSE (3/7/2010 4:45:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrMister (Yes, it was a 707--a smaller plane than the 757 which hit it--but the design parameters were set for a higher airspeed, which meant a higher kinetic energy.) I'm seeing almost a 4-fold difference in gross weight. What was the velocity spec you have? edited to add: You also have to consider a dramatically higher fuel load - about a factor of 2 edited again (not much sleep last night!) The designer of the building said he accounted for structural damage from a 707, but not for fire. And at that point he looked like a guy in the midst of a nightmare. This was on the TLC/Discovery Channel's look at the collapse.

Page: << < prev 16 17 [18] 19 20 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875