Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

Banks,

I have still not had a decent explanation from you how building 7 collapsed due to fire damage, and the damage from falling debris.

I know that high rise buildings are designed to withstand prolonged periods of fire. The video of the collapse does not show a building heavily on fire. I know that a building collapses assymmetrically when the damage is assymetrical. The video of the collapse shows a perfect symmetrical collapse.

You asked me: "Do you expect a building to tip over like a tree" as if it is very obvious buildings don't tip over. This makes me question your expertise, since in designing high-rise buildings the most challenging aspects of the construction is preventing the buildings from tipping over. Transfering the vertical loads is easy, making the building rigid to withstand horizontal forces and torques is the challenge.

So, from my expertise, I know that

1) Fire can damage the steel, causing it to loose strength, warp and deform the construction. This is a gradual process, that may eventually reach a point where parts of the support system fail
2) A single failure in the support system should never lead to inmediate collapse of the entire system.
3) Partial failure of the support system should always be visible before it is critical
4) A total collapse of a medium to high rise will thus always start with partial failure of the support system, and therefore start gradually and progress assymetrically.

Once again I ask you to prove my points wrong. I am interested in it, because of my professional backgrounds, and I'd be happy to hear a believable explanation on how fire cause WTC7 to collapse in the way it did. So far, I haven't heard one yet, that isnt highly unlikely.

I hope we can have a technical discussion on this, disregarding the implications that any conclusion might have. Could prove to be interesting for both of us.

ty,

Marnix

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

If the plane in PA was shot down then are you also saying the government forged the recordings found on the black box which proved that members of that flight attempted to take control of the plane back from the terrorists?

And this forgery was of such good quality that they even had the balls to play the recording to the victim's families?

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
We cant even kidnap arabs in europe. tortue and fly them around without getting found out. NO WAY we could pull this off.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is off course the best argument against a conspiracy. The one big problem I have with 9/11 is the lack of evidence. It was the biggest terror crime ever and yet the authorities allowed over an extended period of time, virtually all physical evidence from the scene to be removed, recycled or suffienctly tampered with to render it useless as evidence. Their is a reason the police cordon off crime areas and are very systematic in their collection and recording of anything that could even remotely be used in court. And yet over a period of months nobody thought it important, (and still don't).

But then again as in48092 points out the one area where this administration has been entirely consistant is it's gross incompetence.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If the plane in PA was shot down then are you also saying the government forged the recordings found on the black box which proved that members of that flight attempted to take control of the plane back from the terrorists?

And this forgery was of such good quality that they even had the balls to play the recording to the victim's families?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, yes to both questions.

If they (I think "they" would be CIA agents) had the balls to kill thousands of innocent people, I'm sure that playing a forged tape to the surviving families wasn't much of a stretch.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

Ha. You are too funny. You can't actually believe what you are writing in this thread, right Cumulonimbus?

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

All of you Conspiracy Theorists in this thread need to stop for a moment and think LOGICALLY (I do have my doubts about your capability to do this) about this:

Did the CIA/US Gov't/President Bush/Dick Cheney need to murder 3000 innocent American lives, destroy part of the Pentagon and damage the economy of the nation's largest city to go to war in the Middle East?

The answer is OF COURSE NOT. Bush could have easily made a case for invading Afghanistan or Iraq without 9/11 ever happening.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
All of you Conspiracy Theorists in this thread need to stop for a moment and think LOGICALLY (I do have my doubts about your capability to do this) about this:

Did the CIA/US Gov't/President Bush/Dick Cheney need to murder 3000 innocent American lives, destroy part of the Pentagon and damage the economy of the nation's largest city to go to war in the Middle East?

The answer is OF COURSE NOT. Bush could have easily made a case for invading Afghanistan or Iraq without 9/11 ever happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I know Americans have not been very happy to sacrice the life of their soldiers after Vietnam, and even after 9/11 there is enough resistance from within the country. A lot of analysis regarding the Afghanistan and Irak wars mentioned how 9/11 helped the American governemt in the national and international support for their war operations in the Middle East. It even offended a lot of the victims of the 9/11 attacks that those tragic events were used as a pretext for the war in Irak.

So yes, 9/11 and the subsequent Acts aided the government and gave tremendous exta power to group of people leading the government.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

I'm not saying that 9/11 didn't aid the government in making it's case for war.

What I'm saying is that it was definitely NOT necessary.

The US government could have in a completely less elaborate plan planted some WMD'S in Iraq/Afghanistan/where ever they wanted and gotten all those things you just mentioned, without murdering a single American life.

I find it sad for the human race that people like you can truly believe this nonsense.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

I wasn't going to wade into this mess because i don't believe in a conspiracy the likes of which is alleged by the movie OP links to, but there are a few details which continue to trouble me.

this one I'm throwing out there just because I've never seen anyone really make a deal of it in the media or anyone respond to it satisfactorily when I've brought it up in conversation: why did Bush claim (on at least two occasions) that he saw the first plane fly into the WTC on TV before entering the classroom in Florida? (there was no footage of the first plane crashing until a day or two later - that of the french crew shooting the documentary on the rookie firemen).

i bring this up from time to time with friends because it's always bugged me...some folks brush it off - typical bush, he meant something other than he said, or "you *know* what he meant", but
a) he said this on more than one occasion, and
b) let's face it, it was a pretty historical moment, one I can personally remember quite clearly four years later (Bush made the comments below only three months later)
c) he told the 9/11 commission a different story, or at least Andrew Card did (the report says that Karl Rove informed him a twin-engine plane had crashed into the towers a few minutes before he entered the classroom)

I find it implausible that he could be confused about these details a mere three months later. What does it mean? I don't know, but I suspect that this president is a liar. (For the sake of bi-partisanship I will add "like the president before him")

[ QUOTE ]
I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident.

[/ QUOTE ]

source

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

Now that is a good question. I just read the press release that you linked. Obviously nobody knows what is going on in that guy's brain. But I think its probable that he didn't actually see the plane hit the tower, but rather watched the news which SAID that a plane flew into the first tower. You are right though, that isn't what he said. Really though, is it that that much of a shock? The guy can't get through a State of the Union Address (a speech President's probably rehearse for hours and hours) or even a 10 minute press conference without bumbling 100 words and just as many sentences.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

Wh1t3bread,

You find it sad for the human race that I believe this nonsense. In this thread I have never said I believe this 'nonsense', I have stressed that I'd rather not believe it, as the reality it implies (cynical domestic terrorism by U.S. Government) is much grimmer than the reality of the official story (the western world threatened by foreign, islamic terrorism). I do have a lot of questions regarding 9/11 though, and I would want to have an explanation that I can live with.

What bugs me a lot, is that 9/11 was covered intensively the few days afterward, planting all the images and the stories in our minds, to later stop broadcasting the images because it would be too painful for us to see. This is a bs reason. We have always been shown the images of WW2, and a lot of other man and nature related disaters, to remind us of what happened, to not to forget. How come that everything surrounding 9/11 is now clouded in secrecy, when a lot of people, even the victims, are simply looking for answers to some very basic questions of what happened that day, who were responsible, how they could have pulled it off, and how it comes that before 9/11 the gov't had no idea of what was about to happen, yet after 9/11 they had a perfect explanation and were able to point at the culprits at the speed of light.

Why is nearly ALL of the essential evidence now secret? Why, for example, were the relatives of the people who died in flight 93 told to not disclose anything they heard of the flight recordings? The government claims it is 'to protect national security' but that is a hollow phrase. The disaster has already happened, openness about what happened is not going to hurt national security in any way. Why is the access to photomaterial, videomaterial, witness accounts, material samples, flight recordings, etc. denied? Can you think of one reasonable reason, other than that there may be something to hide, whatever that may be?

What I am trying to do here, is to falsify the theory that it was a conspiracy. I am not trying to prove the theory, I am trying to falsify it, and I fail at doing so - I find no convincing arguments how it could not have been an inside job. World politics are cynical. You should open your mind to alternative explanations, research them, to either reject them, or investigate further until you can reject them, or until you have no other option than accept them as a possible reality. This is how scientific research works. I have asked a lot of questions in this thread that have found no satisfactory answer. I still hope someone can provide them, but at this point I am pessimistic.

Marnix

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

Marnix- The exterior of the building was damaged causing a redistribution of loads to the perimeter walls and columns. You also have fires which are burning for 7 hours. You are going to have a difference in thermal expansion between the core and exterior load bearing systems. The floors will begin to sag pulling inwards and bowing the perimeter columns and walls. As the loads are shifted, the whole structure becomes highly unstable and overloaded, leading to the collapse. Can I tell you it was a truss or column on the nth floor that was the straw that broke the camels back? No. I don't have specifics on floor plans, building materials, fire loacations, etc. I will be very interested to see the NIST report on WTC7 in 2006. I think then we will be able to have a much more detailed discussion. If you haven't seen their website, I suggest you check it out.

What I would like to know is how did so many people conspire to detonate #7. Were explosives placed during construction, before 9/11, on 9/11? How has nobody talked? Just imagine the magnitude of the operation. The only "evidence" is people saying they herd bombs going off and explosions. Again, do they expect it to just quietly begin to fall? Where is the paper trail? Who's responsible?

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

First of all, nobody except the victims families and certain people in the government know the content of those tapes. By all accounts the tapes are of a struggle between the passengers and the terrorists. That, in and of itself, does not adequately explain the plane going down. The terrorists had a mission, they would not have nose-dived the plane in the face of resistance, they would have continued toward D.C. had they successfully fought off the partisan-passengers. Had the passengers killed off the terrorists, they would have at least made radio contact. There is no report of that. They would have made radio contact even if they had killed all the terrorists with the exception of the one piloting the plane. There is no doubt in my mind that a struggle took place. I know that I would drop the copy of "Super System" that I would have been reading and led a charge against fundamentalists that wanted to hijack the plane I was on, but nothing has been reported about any of the passengers during or after a struggle making radio contact. I doubt the struggle itself caused the plane to plummet to the earth; a missle probably did that.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]

What I would like to know is how did so many people conspire to detonate #7. Were explosives placed during construction, before 9/11, on 9/11? How has nobody talked? Just imagine the magnitude of the operation. The only "evidence" is people saying they herd bombs going off and explosions. Again, do they expect it to just quietly begin to fall? Where is the paper trail? Who's responsible?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm really glad you mentioned this, cuz I was about to. This is yet another monstrous piece of evidence. Demolishing a building takes 2-3 weeks of planning. It's going to be especially hard to set up explosives when the [censored] buliding is on fire. Whoever mentioned it above, how about YOU do some logical analysis. Seriously, the amounts of evidence regarding 9/11 are monstrous. It is really easy to accept that the government did this when you get rid of your damn CNBC/Bill O'Reilly/Stars and Stripes/propaganda-filled block in your head. I say that not in a vicious way, keep in mind, because I had that block at one time too. I know, it's hard to move and I understand if anybody does not want to accept it. But it did happen, the government DID do this, and I will discuss and argue it to my grave because this country and it's money-motivated politics will never change for the better if people don't start figuring out what is really going on. I mean, I'm arguing this on a poker forum, risking being called all kinds of names and such while risking my credibility as well. And it's easy, cuz it means something to me, and it feels right to make people, especially you, my 2+2 friends, understand.

Anyways, here's something I didn't know about the tower collapses. Man, there's so much more evidence than there was when I researched this stuff last year.

[url=http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/index.html[/url]

And here's building 7 on fire, taken from this link :

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...east_fire2.jpg

-Kyle

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I mean, I'm arguing this on a poker forum, risking being called all kinds of names and such while risking my credibility as well.

[/ QUOTE ]
What credibility? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I mean, I'm arguing this on a poker forum, risking being called all kinds of names and such while risking my credibility as well.

[/ QUOTE ]
What credibility? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Rawr.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Marnix- The exterior of the building was damaged causing a redistribution of loads to the perimeter walls and columns. You also have fires which are burning for 7 hours. You are going to have a difference in thermal expansion between the core and exterior load bearing systems. The floors will begin to sag pulling inwards and bowing the perimeter columns and walls. As the loads are shifted, the whole structure becomes highly unstable and overloaded, leading to the collapse. Can I tell you it was a truss or column on the nth floor that was the straw that broke the camels back? No. I don't have specifics on floor plans, building materials, fire loacations, etc. I will be very interested to see the NIST report on WTC7 in 2006. I think then we will be able to have a much more detailed discussion. If you haven't seen their website, I suggest you check it out.


What I would like to know is how did so many people conspire to detonate #7. Were explosives placed during construction, before 9/11, on 9/11? How has nobody talked? Just imagine the magnitude of the operation. The only "evidence" is people saying they herd bombs going off and explosions. Again, do they expect it to just quietly begin to fall? Where is the paper trail? Who's responsible?

[/ QUOTE ]

The magnitude of the operations would be large. But not in the thousands of people, rather hundreds. Everybody involved would first be willing to be involved and therefore not mind not talking, and will also have good reasons not to talk. Even if they'd talk, most people would not believe them. Evidence will have been destroyed, and anyone in the lower ranks who would talk would be discrecdited by the gov't inmediately.

The paper trail? In building 7, there were offices of the CIA and the Secret Services. If it was planned, it was probably planned from there. The paper trail would be gone on the day of the attack itself. Troughout history, the CIA has done a pretty good job in keeping things secret.

Of course, the above is hypothetical. There have been big complots and secret operations in the past. Try to think and imagine yourself how such conspiracies are organised. The fact that you cannot understand or comprehend how the government could pull this off, does not prove it can't.

There is more suspicious surrounding the desctruction of the complex. Did you know that the owner of WTC7, Larry Silverstein, had only recently purchased the lease of the entire WTC complex? That he took out sky high terrorism insurace? That he made billions (yes: billions) of dollars of 9/11? Is that all coincidental? Possibly.

As to building 7: I will check out the NIST website. You refer to the damage caused by fired that burned for 7 hours. On the photo's and videos that are available, there is not a convincing sign of huge fire. There is smoke and flames coming from some of the floors, but it is nothing big compared to other, well recorded, high-rise buildings on fire. You say the only 'evidence' of planned destruction is eye-witness accounts, but the fact remains that it is unlikely for WTC7 to collapse after the damaged suffered. Everything that could have provided hard evidence to prove either hypothesis has been shipped away and recycled quickly. Anyway, I'll definitely check out the NIST report when it's finished to see what analysis they produce - thx for your answer.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

I am thinking about this logically. I think that you are the one that is not.

Answer me this:

What is more likely, the US government secretly planned and conspired to cause 9/11 with such precision and secrecy that no one would ever find out?

Or...


19 terrorists took flight lessons, learned how to fly then hijacked four passenger planes and flew them into buildings?

The answer is obvious. The US government can't even leak the name of one CIA agent without getting caught. The government can't maintain supposedly secret prisons in eastern europe without getting caught. A past President couldn't keep a simple BJ from an intern underwraps.

And now you are all saying that the US government can keep a secret as big as this one. It's completely laughable.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]


You find it sad for the human race that I believe this nonsense. In this thread I have never said I believe this 'nonsense', I have stressed that I'd rather not believe it.



[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. My apologies.

[ QUOTE ]

What bugs me a lot, is that 9/11 was covered intensively the few days afterward, planting all the images and the stories in our minds, to later stop broadcasting the images because it would be too painful for us to see.



[/ QUOTE ]

This couldn't be farther from the truth. Maybe where you are from, these images are not showed over and over again. But I can tell you that here in America I am reminded of them everyday.

[ QUOTE ]

We have always been shown the images of WW2


[/ QUOTE ]

Many of those horrendous images of WW2 weren't shown the public for many years after the war completed.

[ QUOTE ]

yet after 9/11 they had a perfect explanation and were able to point at the culprits at the speed of light.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's really not that difficult to figure out who the culprits were when hours after the attack a terrorist group CLAIMED responsibility.

[ QUOTE ]

Why, for example, were the relatives of the people who died in flight 93 told to not disclose anything they heard of the flight recordings?


[/ QUOTE ]

I imagine the sounds of the recordings on the black box are extremely terrifying and gruesome. You are forgetting that the US is a country were someone can't even pass gas on the radio without getting fined.

[ QUOTE ]

Can you think of one reasonable reason, other than that there may be something to hide, whatever that may be?


[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, I agree with you for once. Yes I bet there is something to hide. But that something isn't that the US government caused 9/11. That something is that the US government failed its citizens up and down the board. Every agency, politician, policital committee, etc. failed the citizens of this country on that day. I think that's a more likely reason to not disclose many of those things you mentioned. And I think someday many years from now we all will have access to that information and we will see that our government did fail us and they knew the failed us.

[ QUOTE ]

I still hope someone can provide them, but at this point I am pessimistic.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well I can tell you that you aren't going to find the answers that you seek here. But I do hope that you find what you are looking for.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
There is more suspicious surrounding the desctruction of the complex. Did you know that the owner of WTC7, Larry Silverstein, had only recently purchased the lease of the entire WTC complex? That he took out sky high terrorism insurace? That he made billions (yes: billions) of dollars of 9/11? Is that all coincidental? Possibly.

[/ QUOTE ]

The businessman who took over the lease of a building complex that was the site of a previous terror attack in 1993 took out insurance against terrorism. What next? Will businessmen in California buy earthquake insurance? Possibly.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
What next? Will businessmen in California buy earthquake insurance? Possibly.

[/ QUOTE ]

No way, that would be a conspiracy!!!! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It is really easy to accept that the government did this when you get rid of your damn CNBC/Bill O'Reilly/Stars and Stripes/propaganda-filled block in your head. I say that not in a vicious way, keep in mind, because I had that block at one time too. I know, it's hard to move and I understand if anybody does not want to accept it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you disagree with some media sources does not mean that these sources are intentional preaching propaganda over every issue.

[ QUOTE ]

But it did happen, the government DID do this, and I will discuss and argue it to my grave because this country and it's money-motivated politics will never change for the better if people don't start figuring out what is really going on.


[/ QUOTE ]

You just asked people to remove "propaganda-filled block" in their heads asking not to be ignorant. Then you say that you will argue this till the day you die? Is this being just slightly ignorant?

[ QUOTE ]

I mean, I'm arguing this on a poker forum, risking being called all kinds of names and such while risking my credibility as well. And it's easy, cuz it means something to me, and it feels right to make people, especially you, my 2+2 friends, understand.


[/ QUOTE ]

Its ok to be passionate about certain ideas and beliefs, to the point that it makes one close-minded is dangerous.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

[ QUOTE ]


when you get rid of your damn CNBC/Bill O'Reilly/Stars and Stripes/propaganda-filled block in your head.



[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW: I [censored] hate Bill OReilly. I'm not a Republican nor a Democrat (hell the last two elections I voted for Republicans and Democrats). My views on 9/11 are based solely on common sense which dictates that Foreign Terrorists hijacked 4 planes and killed 3000+ people.

I think I might be done contributing to this debate.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

Marnix- You talked about falsifying the conspiracy theory and because you could not, you believe it. I see where you are coming from, but on the flip side, the rest of us are saying prove it did happen, and since it can't be proven, we choose to believe it didn't.

As for WTC 7 and the fires, yes they were not huge, but were left to burn on multiple floors all day. There is the question of the fuel tanks in the building. Perhaps a BLEVE contributed to the structure failure. How much did the debris damage contribute to overloading the structure? Again its speculation without knowing the specifics which I hope will be in the NIST report. Did you read the report on 1+2? Do you agree/disagree with their analysis, methodology, conclusions?

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

Cumulo, I see that new medication is working just fine.

Re: who were behind 9/11?
 

Funny. I'll be back on Sunday night to hash up some replies. For now, snowboarding Mt. Bachelor is my only concern.

But I will say this - somebody asked us to prove this theory. Well I've given a significant amount of evidence of which about 5% (yes, I pulled this figure out of thin air) has been responded to by you guys. This whole "What theory is less-crazy sounding" idea is not going to cut it; in other words, I ask you all to respond to those links I posted. If you want me to prove this to you, you're going to have to respond to my evidence, at least so that I know that you read it. To you flamers: This whole argument of calling me crazy and such isn't going to get us anywhere, and I really don't see why you post on this thread if that's all you're going to post. Anyways, see you all on Sunday night.

-Kyle