who were behind 9/11?

Did Osama claim responsibility for the attack?

[Cyrus]

I was guessing the same people who were on the grassy knoll but then I thought Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld.

Then somebody told me it was Cheney and Rumsfeld on the grassy knoll! It all makes sense.

The idea that the planes and ensuing fire could not cause the towers to collapse is quite comical. The ignorance of many a poster is astounding. I have a degree in engineering and fire prevention. Unless you have similar expertise and can give me a legitimate reason why the towers couldn't collapse, Shut The F Up.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

As you could see I typed that I think that was what happened, but thinking that you have a monopoly of analyzing this since you have a degree is very arrogant and incorrect. You need more than a degree to know if what the professors tell you is correct or not. I would take an analytical modest person's opinion over an arrogant expert.

[ QUOTE ]
As you could see I typed that I think that was what happened, but thinking that you have a monopoly of analyzing this since you have a degree is very arrogant and incorrect. You need more than a degree to know if what the professors tell you is correct or not. I would take an analytical modest person's opinion over an arrogant expert.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow.

Just wow.

[ QUOTE ]
As you could see I typed that I think that was what happened, but thinking that you have a monopoly of analyzing this since you have a degree is very arrogant and incorrect. You need more than a degree to know if what the professors tell you is correct or not. I would take an analytical modest person's opinion over an arrogant expert.

[/ QUOTE ]
And my point is that people who have no knowledge of lightweight highrise construction and fire behavior are spouting off opinions as fact just because they see/hear/read something somewhere. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if they want to add something to the discussion, why not deal in facts and science.

[HopeydaFish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Explain to me why I should listen to someone who starts off the thread with "who were"...?

[/ QUOTE ]

you shouldnt if you don't want to. Excuse me for my grammar errors, im not a native english speaker.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry then. But this topic has been covered here and I'd rather not watch an hour long rehash.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some parts were interesting, I recommend to watch it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I watched it. I found it interesting. A lot (most) of it is hogwash, but there were a couple of things that I did find pretty compelling. If anything, it'll make me do a little research into some of the claims he made.

[NobodysFreak]

What counts as science isn't entirely objective. Not to discredit your claim. I agree with you that the planes are capable of brining down the towers and I'm sure you're much more knowledgable about buildings, but to think that engineering and science aren't infuenced by policy and opinion is incorrect.

[Cumulonimbus]

Here's some random links I have for any of you guys that want to further your investigations.

ABC- Operation Northwoods (a must read!)

VIDEO: Owner of WTCs admits they "pulled" the building

911 Truth Very informative and reliable stuff. You should spend a lot of time here.

EDIT: And two pre-collapse images of the Pentagon. These are what initially drew me in.





Flame away.

-Kyle

EDIT 2 - Man, I haven't gotten into this stuff forever. I stopped thinking about it a while ago cuz it just makes ya sad. Anyways, I found a cool little video ... not much for 9/11 evidence, but it illustrates the motives behind it. This was found at 911truth.org

[Marnixvdb]

[ QUOTE ]
The idea that the planes and ensuing fire could not cause the towers to collapse is quite comical. The ignorance of many a poster is astounding. I have a degree in engineering and fire prevention. Unless you have similar expertise and can give me a legitimate reason why the towers couldn't collapse, Shut The F Up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Banks, I haven't said that the towers could not have collapsed because of the plane crashes, only that the way how they collapsed struck me as inconsistent with the damage.

Also, I have stressed a few times that I am mainly interested in WTC tower 7 - the 47 story building that collapsed later on the day. I have a degree in architecture and engineering, and although I am not a fire-prevention specialist, I have been trained in designing buildings to perform under heavy strain. I cannot explain how the fires in building 7 could have caused it to collapse like it did (symmetrical, fast, on its own footprint). And I know they shouldnt have.

Maybe you can explain it to me with your expertise?

Marnix