Jump to content

9/11 Controlled demolition.


Parky

How do people think these buildings came down?  

182 members have voted

  1. 1. How do people think these buildings came down?

    • Two jets and jet fuel and impact velocity.
    • As above but also the buildings were quite old and not that well made.
    • The jets and a descision by someone 'to pull' the them.
    • They would never have collapsed like that without explosives weakening them.
    • Morrisey did it.


Recommended Posts

Yep, there are people with practically the entire alphabet after their name who say global warming is a myth, the earth is 6000 years old, evolution is false and aliens are abducting texans and probing them.  I don't believe them either.

 

Aliens etc - astro-physicists have worked out the probability that they exist using complex mathematical models and basic probability theory. Its Billions and billions to one on that they exist.

 

* Note to self - stop coming over as a bit of a twat.

 

but the billions of years it would take for them to get here would mean that they have a TINY window of opportunity to get here and find us evolved enough to report on the probings, while they would have to, on their own planet, evolve sufficiently to make working cryogenics and REALLY FUCKING FAST spaceships, target our planet and have an interest in our vastly inferior race... first ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

did it really look like a planned demolition?

 

it looks more like the top falls onto the bottom at the point where the planes entered:

 

http://www.factsofisrael.com/en/images/articles/911/wtc-collapse-01.jpg

 

so not a straight-down collapse, in fact the collapse took out some nearby buildings too, and made some damaged beyond repair (130 liberty st). you can tell that it collapsed more at one side than the other, cos the steel lattice at one side stayed erect for up to 15 storeys after the collapse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BlufGrandma

Considering how many are on that list, you've picked suspiciously few, my dear.

 

My nan talks like that, maybe you two are friends?

 

Here's a task for you grandma: how many on the list are structural engineers, what %? how many have had their theory published in academic peer review journals to ensure reliability?

 

Some have defined themselves as physicists, physics is a broad subject, it does not means they are experts in all sub categories of physics, such as structural engineering which is what is required in regards to explaining the tower collapse.

 

An I.T expert may have some knowledge of programming, but he's not an expert in programming, a programmer is. Programming is a category within I.T, and so is networking, so is web design.

 

Come on grandma, you have to ask yourself why so many on the list are not even physicists. Once you've done that, ask yourself why you needed to adopt Parky's grandma character "my dear".

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Parky's outlandish drivel on this board, including his conspiracy thoeries are cringeworthy.

 

Parky hails Castro as a legend, hates America with a passion and defends Islamic terrorists who deliberately murder civillians.

 

I guess that makes him pretty well qualified to offer credible, well-argued debate on 9/11, huh?

 

In my opinion, you're a marxist fruitcake who's a few cans short of a six-pack.  blueyes.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the buildings came down without the planes...They would have to explain how terrorists had that much time and access to such a prominent building. The way the buildings were constructed with the 12 pillar central steel core, it couldn't be levelled with a truck bomb or summat....Many charges have to be placed at key points on the internal frame, all this takes time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

did it really look like a planned demolition?

 

it looks more like the top falls onto the bottom at the point where the planes entered:

 

http://www.factsofisrael.com/en/images/articles/911/wtc-collapse-01.jpg

 

so not a straight-down collapse, in fact the collapse took out some nearby buildings too, and made some damaged beyond repair (130 liberty st). you can tell that it collapsed more at one side than the other, cos the steel lattice at one side stayed erect for up to 15 storeys after the collapse.

 

Aheah... fake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BlufGrandma

Considering how many are on that list, you've picked suspiciously few, my dear.

 

My nan talks like that, maybe you two are friends?

 

Yeah.

 

Here's a task for you grandma: how many on the list are structural engineers, what %? how many have had their theory published in academic peer review journals to ensure reliability?

 

Some have defined themselves as physicists, physics is a broad subject, it does not means they are experts in all sub categories of physics, such as structural engineering which is what is required in regards to explaining the tower collapse.

 

An I.T expert may have some knowledge of programming, but he's not an expert in programming, a programmer is. Programming is a category within I.T, and so is networking, so is web design.

 

Come on grandma, you have to ask yourself why so many on the list are not even physicists. Once you've done that, ask yourself why you needed to adopt Parky's grandma character "my dear".

 

 

Zero, I imagine, the way you've snatched at this.  However, does that make what has been published by the site wrong?  Forget whether it is, just that, because they aren't structural engineers, they must be wrong?  BlueStar's site was interesting, and tried (successfully?) to debunk theories, but we'll see on that.

 

And I called you my dear, because the Aliens told me to.  That might well be Parky...

Link to post
Share on other sites

did it really look like a planned demolition?

 

it looks more like the top falls onto the bottom at the point where the planes entered:

 

http://www.factsofisrael.com/en/images/articles/911/wtc-collapse-01.jpg

 

so not a straight-down collapse, in fact the collapse took out some nearby buildings too, and made some damaged beyond repair (130 liberty st). you can tell that it collapsed more at one side than the other, cos the steel lattice at one side stayed erect for up to 15 storeys after the collapse.

 

Aheah... fake.

 

Seconded.

 

That picture is fake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on 9/11

 

The CIA were complicit in some way.

 

The terrorists were al qaida operatives.

 

The towers could have been rigged to collpase in such an event as the most economically and operationally efficient way to deal with a major attack. From a security point of view it could be viewed as a good thing they collapsed then rather than continued to burn with a couple of planes hanging out the side. Imagine trying to install the neccessary explosives to demolish them safely AFTER the attack!!!!!! Anyone thought of that yet????????

 

Silverstein is a dodgy fucker.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry elephant, keefaz, but that's how it happened.

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SrSuu0fw1mI

 

suppose that's a fake too  :roll:

 

Agreed, it's not fake.  Although, the photo looks weird, for whatever reason.  One buidling clearly toppled to the side, that was due to the plane hitting more to the side then the first impact which was pretty much the centre.  The top part of the building falling to the side though doesn't mean it couldn't have started falling due to controlled explosions though. 

 

Infact, if that was falling to the side, which it clearly was, why didn't it just fall off?  Surely it wouldn't have been placing all its weight on the floors below? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on 9/11

 

The CIA were complicit in some way. - Agreed.

 

The terrorists were al qaida operatives. - Agreed.

 

The towers could have been rigged to collpase in such an event as the most economically and operationally efficient way to deal with a major attack. From a security point of view it could be viewed as a good thing they collapsed then rather than continued to burn with a couple of planes hanging out the side. Imagine trying to install the neccessary explosives to demolish them safely AFTER the attack!!!!!! Anyone thought of that yet???????? - Good point.

 

Silverstein is a dodgy fucker. - Agreed.

 

The lack of financial support for the commission looking into 9/11 is also something to be suspicious about.  More money was given to the investigations into Clinton and his blowjobs, than the greatest attack on America in the modern era.  It was also delayed for a bizarre amount of time.  The man that headed the commission Lee H. Hamilton also believes they were set up to fail.  Given the delays and lack of funds.  He also admits that he thinks the official version of events will change over the decades.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly who is this Silverstein?

 

Just read that he insured the buildings for a couple of hundred million dollars six months prior to the attack. He made around 4-6 billion dollars on that insurance..

 

Is that for real or is that just pure bullshit?

 

That's for real.  No conspiracies there, just search his name, it's all 'FACT!'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chix:

 

''My take on 9/11

 

The CIA were complicit in some way. Don't agree, mainly because the CIA were the victims of swinging cuts afterwards and also took the most criticism. This organisation is geared to survive and wouldn't bring this on themselves. One

CELL OF THE CIA...Perhaps.

 

The terrorists were al qaida operatives. Broadly agree although some would have been with the security services, who's I don't know. Others would have been told they were part of an excercise and wouldn't have known jack shit till the last few minutes.

 

The towers could have been rigged to collpase in such an event as the most economically and operationally efficient way to deal with a major attack. From a security point of view it could be viewed as a good thing they collapsed then rather than continued to burn with a couple of planes hanging out the side. Imagine trying to install the neccessary explosives to demolish them safely AFTER the attack!!!!!! Anyone thought of that yet????????VERY GOOD POINT AND YET another example of your fine mind.

 

Silverstein is a dodgy fucker.'' One of the dodgiest. People are still looking for the gold that was apparently kept under one of the towers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly who is this Silverstein?

 

Just read that he insured the buildings for a couple of hundred million dollars six months prior to the attack. He made around 4-6 billion dollars on that insurance..

 

Is that for real or is that just pure bullshit?

 

That's for real.  No conspiracies there, just search his name, it's all 'FACT!'

 

I mean, are there any evidence of an insurance like that?

 

For the record, I'm not much for conspiracies and especially not in this case. People are talking about USA faked the moon landing, which I'm fine with. But 9/11, with thousands of casualties, you got to be more careful. I find all this conspiracy talk rather disrespectful to be honest...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bluf

Zero, I imagine, the way you've snatched at this.  However, does that make what has been published by the site wrong?  Forget whether it is, just that, because they aren't structural engineers, they must be wrong?

 

It makes whatever they write unlikely to be true and unreliable due to their lack of expertise in terms of experience and/or qualifications and/or publications in academic journals etc.

 

What exactly can a Folklore scholar know about structural engineering? about as much as you or I. I know nothing at all about structural engineering.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chix:

 

''My take on 9/11

 

The CIA were complicit in some way. Don't agree, mainly because the CIA were the victims of swinging cuts afterwards and also took the most criticism. This organisation is geared to survive and wouldn't bring this on themselves. One

CELL OF THE CIA...Perhaps.

 

The terrorists were al qaida operatives. Broadly agree although some would have been with the security services, who's I don't know. Others would have been told they were part of an excercise and wouldn't have known jack shit till the last few minutes.

 

The towers could have been rigged to collpase in such an event as the most economically and operationally efficient way to deal with a major attack. From a security point of view it could be viewed as a good thing they collapsed then rather than continued to burn with a couple of planes hanging out the side. Imagine trying to install the neccessary explosives to demolish them safely AFTER the attack!!!!!! Anyone thought of that yet????????VERY GOOD POINT AND YET another example of your fine mind.

 

Silverstein is a dodgy fucker.'' One of the dodgiest. People are still looking for the gold that was apparently kept under one of the towers.

 

I love this guy ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Knightrider

what's the point of the planes if they have explosives placed inside the building?

 

To shock and awe. To create the drama that was 9/11. Had they just pressed the button to bring them down (17 seconds to collapse) it wouldn't have had the same impact.

 

Just assuming BTW, I don't know where I stand on the whole 9/11 topic, much less the controlled demolition theory. I will say this, however, we would be foolish to write off opponents of the official story as crack-pots and mad conspiracy theorists, especially when there are valid and legitimate issues being raised by professionals. I for one would not be shocked or surprised if I were to one day learn that 9/11 was one big staged event by the US/and others. They are more than capable and they've masterminded far worse, let us not forget.

 

All I know is that the whole event prior, during and after stinks from the top to the bottom. If pushed I would say I'm skeptical of all or any "official" line and having watched the whole event live, I just don't buy the "bad guys did it" line. They had help and lots of it in my opinion.

 

I don't believe we are at war with terror either, there are other agendas directing that, but for what end, who knows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...