People who do not think 911 was an inside job, explain this to me please (video)

[The Duck]

Official explanation: Local fires caused the core frame to weaken causing a perfect vertical implosion.

I dont buy it and I would like to hear what you guys have to say about it.

[Pleasurepays]

interesting... never seen this discussion play out.

i must have missed the whole thing.

what is this 9/11 you speak of?

[Phoenix]

[The Duck]

Another interesting video.

[tranza]

Nice vids!

[bronco67]

OMG! You cracked the case! You'll get your detective shield any day now!

Are you some type of expert on how buildings are supposed to fall? I'm sure they were rigged to blow by evil invisible explosives experts, with invisible equipment, TONS of invisible explosives, miles of invisible wiring, etc.

See where I'm going with this? Think about it, and do some research on controlled demolition, because anyone who thinks this was an "inside job" likely hasn't looked into it.

[grumpy]

you are on to something, who are you gonna call?

[DamianJ]

Where's my FUCKING tinfoil hat when I need it?

[The Duck]

Originally Posted by bronco67

OMG! You cracked the case! You'll get your detective shield any day now!

Are you some type of expert on how buildings are supposed to fall? I'm sure they were rigged to blow by evil invisible explosives experts, with invisible equipment, TONS of invisible explosives, miles of invisible wiring, etc.

See where I'm going with this? Think about it, and do some research on controlled demolition, because anyone who thinks this was an "inside job" likely hasn't looked into it.

Please give me one example of a building that has collapsed in a similar way due to fire. You can't and your argument is now dead.

[AnalProbe]

I knew this since 2002 already...

The best vidz available are widely banned, not so easy to find...

Don't have much time at this moment to search, the real sensitive stuff gets deleted at uploaded with new names all the time at Youtube...

[cykoe6]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Are you some type of expert on how buildings are supposed to fall? I'm sure they were rigged to blow by evil invisible explosives experts, with invisible equipment, TONS of invisible explosives, miles of invisible wiring, etc.

See where I'm going with this? Think about it, and do some research on controlled demolition, because anyone who thinks this was an "inside job" likely hasn't looked into it.

Don't try and confuse Kandah with logic or facts. Where he lives it gets dark at 2 in the afternoon leaving him about 20 hours of darkness per day spent alone in his tiny government apartment to try and unravel the secrets of the most carefully planned, carefully executed and successfully concealed plot of all time..... all masterminded by someone who we have been assured was a mindless chimp with an IQ of 65.

This is a plot that would have required the cooperation of thousands of people in a multitude of locations and levels of government to execute and yet no one has come forward. A plot this devious and well concealed requires someone as dedicated as Kandah to unravel, so we should all just leave him alone to do his important work.

[Rochard]

Why does this need explaining?

Think about this for just a moment. Two very tall, large buildings, millions of tons of concrete and steel fell right next to the building. Most likely WTC7 was completely moved off it's foundation when the two towers fell. Combined with the towers falling and the fire that raged in the building, it weakened the bottom floors which gave way.

[The Duck]

I might not be an architect or and engineer, but these guys are.

Architects and engineers for 911 truth

"Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, of Novato California, writes: "Why would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10 seconds, pulverizing the contents into dust and ash - twice. Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust."

Paul W. Mason, structural engineer, of Melbourne, Australia, argues: "In my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible explanation!"

"In my opinion WTC7 was with the utmost probability brought down by controlled demolition done by experts" -Hugo Bachmann, Professor emeritus for structural analysis and construction at ETH and former Chairman of the Department of Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.

[Darkland]

Okay, get an aluminum can to represent your tower.

Empty the can of its contents.

Place can on table and get a pen or your finger will do but be sure to get it out of the way quickly.

Place palm of hand flat on top of can and apply a large amount of pressure downwards and hold it there.

Take your pen and use it to poke the side of the can, distorting its structural integrity.

See what happens? All that downward pressure collapsed the can neatly in one direction, not to the sides but straight down.

How is that?

[The Duck]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Why does this need explaining?

Think about this for just a moment. Two very tall, large buildings, millions of tons of concrete and steel fell right next to the building. Most likely WTC7 was completely moved off it's foundation when the two towers fell. Combined with the towers falling and the fire that raged in the building, it weakened the bottom floors which gave way.

To me that explanation does not make sense. With that logic other buildings around the complex should also have collapsed. And regarding the fire, check out the video below of the windsor building in madrid that was a raging inferno for 24 hours totally destroying the building, but it did not collapse.

[Number1Thumb]

Im just glad the case has been finally cracked, I was worried the truth was not going to come out. Now let's move on to the Kennedy assasination please. Kandah got any info on that one? THX

[The Duck]

Originally Posted by Darkland

Okay, get an aluminum can to represent your tower.

Empty the can of its contents.

Place can on table and get a pen or your finger will do but be sure to get it out of the way quickly.

Place palm of hand flat on top of can and apply a large amount of pressure downwards and hold it there.

Take your pen and use it to poke the side of the can, distorting its structural integrity.

See what happens? All that downward pressure collapsed the can neatly in one direction, not to the sides but straight down.

How is that?

Aluminum cans are hollow and does not have massive steel core columns. The whole analogy is absurd.

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by kandah

To me that explanation does not make sense. With that logic other buildings around the complex should also have collapsed. And regarding the fire, check out the video below of the windsor building in madrid that was a raging inferno for 24 hours totally destroying the building, but it did not collapse.

Did that building have millions of tons of debris hit the ground next to it, and on it? Did that building have thousands of gallons of diesel fuel that was burning in it too? Did that building have the same structure as building 7?

[AnalProbe]

Here you go :

[Darkland]

Originally Posted by kandah

Aluminum cans are hollow and does not have massive steel core columns.

Tell me you are not that thick. Several floors were destroyed when the plane crashed in there at 100's of miles per hour. Forget the dumb fucking steal can't melt at blah blah blah temperatures when in point of fact what you SHOULD be thinking about is the damage to the steel core by the impact making it and every floor above it structurally compromised.

What steel support is left sits there holding up 100's and 1,000's of tons or more of building. When it begins to fail, all that massive tonnage of building comes straight down like a hand crushing the top of an alumminum can collapsing the steel frame on the floor below by sheer brute force. Adding the weight of that to the next floor which collapses and so forth by the steadily increasing weight that is coming down at unimaginable pressures.

Yes the core was made to hold up the building, what is wasn't made to withstand was the pressure of part of that building collapsing down several floors instantly. After that physics takes over and for all intents and purposes it behaves just like that aluminimum can.

[Number1Thumb]

OK enough already, this 911 thing has been cracked, lets move on to that Kennedy quandry. Im still in progress of mapping out the grassy knoll, anyone with info please let me know.

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by kandah

Please give me one example of a building that has collapsed in a similar way due to fire. You can't and your argument is now dead.

My lack of physics expertise, and inability to explain why the buildings fell is NOTHING compared to the conspiracy nut's inability to explain the logistical impossibility of such a huge secret operation. We can't really discuss deliberately collapsed building physics, until you explain how a devious plot of this magnitude could actually be possible.

You're a fruitcake.

[SuzzyQ]

Originally Posted by bronco67

My lack of physics expertise, and inability to explain why the buildings fell is NOTHING compared to the conspiracy nut's inability to explain the logistical impossibility of such a huge secret operation. We can't really discuss deliberately collapsed building physics, until you explain how a devious plot of this magnitude could actually be possible.

You're a fruitcake.

I agree 100%. Your a nutcase. Explain how hundreds of people could be in on this and not 1 of them comes out and spills the beans?

Put down the crack pipe.

[The Duck]

Originally Posted by bronco67

My lack of physics expertise, and inability to explain why the buildings fell is NOTHING compared to the conspiracy nut's inability to explain the logistical impossibility of such a huge secret operation. We can't really discuss deliberately collapsed building physics, until you explain how a devious plot of this magnitude could actually be possible.

You're a fruitcake.

I dont have to explain how it could be possible. I see the collapses and the evidence that suggests a controlled demolition and demand a new investigation. How and why it was done is up to that investigation to explore.

[Martin]

Interesting Tenants of Wtc 7.

Floor
46-47 Mechanical floors
28-45 Salomon Smith Barney (SSB)
26-27 Standard Chartered Bank
25 Inland Revenue Service (IRS)
25 Department of Defense (DOD)
25 Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
24 Inland Revenue Service (IRS)
23 Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
22 Federal Home Loan Bank of New York
21 First State Management Group
19-21 ITT Hartford Insurance Group
19 National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC)
18 Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
14-17 Vacant
13 Provident Financial Management
11-13 Securities and Exchange Commission
9-10 US Secret Service
7-8 American Express Bank International
7 OEM generators and day tank
6 Switchgear, storage
5 Switchgear, generators, transformers
4 Upper level of 3rd floor, switchgear
3 Lobby, SSB Conference Center, rentable space, manage
2 Open to first floor lobby, transformer vault upper level, upper level switchgear
1 Lobby, loading docks, existing Con Ed transformer vaults, fuel storage, lower level switchgear

[Tom_PM]

When people say "no building in history has ever collapsed like that" I always just think back and wonder how during ALL of those other incidents of 2 commercially hijacked planes full of people and fuel crashing into all those OTHER giant twin towers.. how come all those other buildings didnt collapse the same way?

It's creepy I'm telling you.

[AnalProbe]

Go here for the full story :

http://video.google.com/videosearch?...8&sa=N&tab=wv#


My postcount is 322-9

You gotta love these numbers.


I am moving out.

As I stated in this thread : http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...=872779&page=3

And with moving out I mean really moving out.

I'm emigrating bigtime, no matter what it costs.

Things are getting nasty soon.

Going back to 811.

Best luck to all of you, will be back later, if possible.

322
9
Labr3t

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

When people say "no building in history has ever collapsed like that" I always just think back and wonder how during ALL of those other incidents of 2 commercially hijacked planes full of people and fuel crashing into all those OTHER giant twin towers.. how come all those other buildings didnt collapse the same way?

It's creepy I'm telling you.

[Martin]

Originally Posted by SuzzyQ

I agree 100%. Your a nutcase. Explain how hundreds of people could be in on this and not 1 of them comes out and spills the beans?

Put down the crack pipe.

Easy, they just hand you a picture of your kids going to school, your wife doing her shopping, your mom tending to her garden and let you know how they could wipe you and your family off the face of the planet. The people behind 911 would also know if they did come forward who would believe them anyway? Nobody besides the 911 truth movement that are already labeled as crazies. Who would risk coming forward then?

[Martin]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

When people say "no building in history has ever collapsed like that" I always just think back and wonder how during ALL of those other incidents of 2 commercially hijacked planes full of people and fuel crashing into all those OTHER giant twin towers.. how come all those other buildings didnt collapse the same way?

It's creepy I'm telling you.

No plane hit WTC 7

[Twistys Tim]

The biggest problem with an 'inside job' theory is the secrecy that would be required from the countless people involved in planning and executing this kind of attack.

The CIA established TOP SECRET prisons in Eastern Europe, and we knew about them withing about 18-months. These were sites so secret, that the only people who knew they existed were the CIA top brass, the politicians who authorized there existence, and he CIA personnel who were torturing prisoners at the TOP SECRET prisons. And yet, we found out about them within a very short time frame.

The kind of demolition you have claimed occurred at WTC7 would have required the use of outside civilian contractors to rig the building, and it would have required the residents of the building (ordinary people) to either be unaware or to turn a blind eye (be complict) to the rigging of their place of employment for demolition. Furthermore, everyone on the inside of this job would have to stay silent forever. All of this is highly unlikely. What about the janitor of WTC7...? Is he on the inside of this job, and has been paid of enough to secure his silence FOREVER. Not likely -- he would have had to have been killed, along with everyone who witnessed the planning and preparation for the demolition (secretaries, security guards, secret service agents, cleaners, receptionists, mail room clerks, etc. etc. etc.) They would have all had to be killed.

[Number1Thumb]

Originally Posted by Twistys Tim

The biggest problem with an 'inside job' theory is the secrecy that would be required from the countless people involved in planning and executing this kind of attack.

The CIA established TOP SECRET prisons in Eastern Europe, and we knew about them withing about 18-months. These were sites so secret, that the only people who knew they existed were the CIA top brass, the politicians who authorized there existence, and he CIA personnel who were torturing prisoners at the TOP SECRET prisons. And yet, we found out about them within a very short time frame.

The kind of demolition you have claimed occurred at WTC7 would have required the use of outside civilian contractors to rig the building, and it would have required the residents of the building (ordinary people) to either be unaware or to turn a blind eye (be complict) to the rigging of their place of employment for demolition. Furthermore, everyone on the inside of this job would have to stay silent forever. All of this is highly unlikely. What about the janitor of WTC7...? Is he on the inside of this job, and has been paid of enough to secure his silence FOREVER. Not likely -- he would have had to have been killed, along with everyone who witnessed the planning and preparation for the demolition (secretaries, security guards, secret service agents, cleaners, receptionists, mail room clerks, etc. etc. etc.) They would have all had to be killed.

Cmon, common sense has no place here.

[WarChild]

Here we go again, more of Kandah's nonsense. Why even bother with him? Really, just let him think what he wants. It's not like it makes any difference what a few retards believe happened or didn't happen.

[Martin]

Originally Posted by Twistys Tim

The biggest problem with an 'inside job' theory is the secrecy that would be required from the countless people involved in planning and executing this kind of attack.

The CIA established TOP SECRET prisons in Eastern Europe, and we knew about them withing about 18-months. These were sites so secret, that the only people who knew they existed were the CIA top brass, the politicians who authorized there existence, and he CIA personnel who were torturing prisoners at the TOP SECRET prisons. And yet, we found out about them within a very short time frame.

The kind of demolition you have claimed occurred at WTC7 would have required the use of outside civilian contractors to rig the building, and it would have required the residents of the building (ordinary people) to either be unaware or to turn a blind eye (be complict) to the rigging of their place of employment for demolition. Furthermore, everyone on the inside of this job would have to stay silent forever. All of this is highly unlikely. What about the janitor of WTC7...? Is he on the inside of this job, and has been paid of enough to secure his silence FOREVER. Not likely -- he would have had to have been killed, along with everyone who witnessed the planning and preparation for the demolition (secretaries, security guards, secret service agents, cleaners, receptionists, mail room clerks, etc. etc. etc.) They would have all had to be killed.

For me it just seems more impossible to have a group of terrorist trained on single engine planes and from reading books take over 4 huge planes full of people with pocket knives then go on to hit 75% of their targets and knock down 3 huge steel framed buildings over the most heavily guarded air spaces in the world.

[Tom_PM]

Originally Posted by Martin

No plane hit WTC 7

Yep. And the theory that no building has ever collapsed like that only holds up as an analog if surrounding skyscrapers have been smashed into by commercial airliners full of fuel.

You dont think erecting a building out in the desert and waiting for it to collapse in on itself is a fair analog right? Well I'm saying me either, you'd have to duplicate as perfectly as possible the exact conditions that existed to do a comparison.
Where's Adam and Jamie when you need em?

[The Truth Hurts]

Originally Posted by Martin

No plane hit WTC 7

No but maybe the two big ass buildings that had recently collapsed right next to it might have.

[Martin]

Originally Posted by Martin

For me it just seems more impossible to have a group of terrorist trained on single engine planes and from reading books take over 4 huge planes full of people with pocket knives then go on to hit 75% of their targets and knock down 3 huge steel framed buildings over the most heavily guarded air spaces in the world.

But why believe me? I'm a crazy tin foil hat guy. Let's hear from the pilot who flew the same planes that actually went into the buildings that day.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...59506368831731

He must be on the crack too.

[D Ghost]

The 1975 fire in North Tower burned longer and didnt cause it to collpase... http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/Ap..._WTC_Fire.html

Anyway an office fire is not hot enough to weaken steel that much...

[D Ghost]

"For me it just seems more impossible to have a group of terrorist trained on single engine planes and from reading books take over 4 huge planes full of people with pocket knives then go on to hit 75% of their targets and knock down 3 huge steel framed buildings over the most heavily guarded air spaces in the world."

yeah

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Are you some type of expert on how buildings are supposed to fall? I'm sure they were rigged to blow by evil invisible explosives experts, with invisible equipment, TONS of invisible explosives, miles of invisible wiring, etc.

i'm no explosives expert but did timothy mcveigh use miles of invisible wiring and invisible equipment ?

[The Duck]

I am not the only one questioning the official story, check out this list of members of the group scholars for 911 truth; http://twilightpines.com//index.php?...37&Itemi d=35. Firefighters for 911 truth; http://firefightersfor911truth.org/. I already mentioned the engineer and architechs group in a post above.

Check out this site with some amazing papers on the subject http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters.html and http://physics911.net/ where they are all about science. In the end you can't argue with the laws of physics right?

What some of you fail to realise is that there is a big growing movement of highly educated people in a wide variety of fields who are now organizing and working to give their side of the story. It's not just some webmaster in the north who is rambling incoherently because of a lack of proper sunlight exposure.

[SuzzyQ]

Originally Posted by Martin

Easy, they just hand you a picture of your kids going to school, your wife doing her shopping, your mom tending to her garden and let you know how they could wipe you and your family off the face of the planet. The people behind 911 would also know if they did come forward who would believe them anyway? Nobody besides the 911 truth movement that are already labeled as crazies. Who would risk coming forward then?

Oh come on... That argument is fucked up on so many levels. This isnt some third world country where that shit is the norm. Has it occurred to any of you nut jobs that someone would have gone to the media?. Even with the threat of being wiped 'off the face of the planet' people would have talked. The media would have been all over this like white on rice. If this was an 'inside job' don't you think the NY Times or the Washington Post would have been all over it?. Hell, those 2 newspapers have no problems exposing things that have caused national security problems.

I find it insulting that all these nut jobs who think it was an inside job don't even live in the NYC area. They all live outside of the NYC area or in another country.

And where were you nut jobs on 9/11?. You sure as hell were not in lower Manhattan like my husband and I were.

[Darkland]

Originally Posted by deejne

The 1975 fire in North Tower burned longer and didnt cause it to collpase... http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/Ap..._WTC_Fire.html

Anyway an office fire is not hot enough to weaken steel that much...

Originally Posted by Darkland

Several floors were destroyed when the plane crashed in there at 100's of miles per hour. Forget the dumb fucking steal can't melt at blah blah blah temperatures when in point of fact what you SHOULD be thinking about is the damage to the steel core by the impact making it and every floor above it structurally compromised.

I am not even sure why this argument continues because the fact of the matter is this:

Given ANY historical event that has two perspectives there will always be people who will except the dark version no matter how impossible or invent it if it isn't there and then you will have those who accept the other version, the one closer to logic.

Ever heard of Occams Razor?

No matter what evidence is shown, and you conspiracy nuts have none to speak of, you will not accept it. Even if there was rock solid evidence that there was no conspiracy you still wouldn't accept it.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by Twistys Tim

The biggest problem with an 'inside job' theory is the secrecy that would be required from the countless people involved in planning and executing this kind of attack.

The CIA established TOP SECRET prisons in Eastern Europe, and we knew about them withing about 18-months. These were sites so secret, that the only people who knew they existed were the CIA top brass, the politicians who authorized there existence, and he CIA personnel who were torturing prisoners at the TOP SECRET prisons. And yet, we found out about them within a very short time frame.

The kind of demolition you have claimed occurred at WTC7 would have required the use of outside civilian contractors to rig the building, and it would have required the residents of the building (ordinary people) to either be unaware or to turn a blind eye (be complict) to the rigging of their place of employment for demolition. Furthermore, everyone on the inside of this job would have to stay silent forever. All of this is highly unlikely. What about the janitor of WTC7...? Is he on the inside of this job, and has been paid of enough to secure his silence FOREVER. Not likely -- he would have had to have been killed, along with everyone who witnessed the planning and preparation for the demolition (secretaries, security guards, secret service agents, cleaners, receptionists, mail room clerks, etc. etc. etc.) They would have all had to be killed.

problem with that is the only reason we know is because other countries told us

[_Richard_]

anyways, my opinion is there is no way i can think of that would cause three of those buildings to fall like that.

Chaos is ugly, that was neat

[Twistys Tim]

Originally Posted by Martin

For me it just seems more impossible to have a group of terrorist trained on single engine planes and from reading books take over 4 huge planes full of people with pocket knives then go on to hit 75% of their targets and knock down 3 huge steel framed buildings over the most heavily guarded air spaces in the world.

Hang on -- that's another matter. We were talking about the collapse of WTC7, not the hi-jackings. To prepare a building for a successful controlled demolition takes weeks of preparation, that involves stripping the interior of the inside of the building, to expose key support columns. Non-load bearing partitions and drywall need to be removed to expose the columns. Selected columns on floors where explosives will be set are drilled and nitroglycerin and TNT are placed in the holes. Smaller columns and walls are wrapped in detonating cord.

This isn't the kind of thing that would go unnoticed by the people working in the WTC7 building. Especially as many of the residents were secret service agents, who might be more than a bit curious as to why their office has been stripped and rigged with TNT (unless they were all in on the plan as well).

It don't add up, and could not have happened. If it can be proved that the fire did not bring the WTC7 building down, then there would have to be another explanation for the collapse as the controlled demolition theory could not have happened without being exposed to scrutiny / discovery during it's planning, and reporting of those accounts after the fact.

[huey]

What happened with building 7 will always keep doubt in my mind. I saw the clip where the man that owned the building says it was brought down, not fell down.

[SuzzyQ]

Originally Posted by Twistys Tim

Hang on -- that's another matter. We were talking about the collapse of WTC7, not the hi-jackings. To prepare a building for a successful controlled demolition takes weeks of preparation, that involves stripping the interior of the inside of the building, to expose key support columns. Non-load bearing partitions and drywall need to be removed to expose the columns. Selected columns on floors where explosives will be set are drilled and nitroglycerin and TNT are placed in the holes. Smaller columns and walls are wrapped in detonating cord.

This isn't the kind of thing that would go unnoticed by the people working in the WTC7 building. Especially as many of the residents were secret service agents, who might be more than a bit curious as to why their office has been stripped and rigged with TNT (unless they were all in on the plan as well).

It don't add up, and could not have happened. If it can be proved that the fire did not bring the WTC7 building down, then there would have to be another explanation for the collapse as the controlled demolition theory could not have happened without being exposed to scrutiny / discovery during it's planning, and reporting of those accounts after the fact.

The support structure of WTC 7 was destroyed when WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed since it was only a few hundred feet away from both WTC towers.

[Tom_PM]

Musta been built with demo explosives already in position. Just waiting for the word from the fire chief to "pull it", at which point Batman used the Batremote to Batexplode Batbuilding7.

Sorry, but sheesh. We know it looked like a demolition. And the face on mars REAAAAAlllllllllllyyyyyyyyyyyyyy looks like a face on mars, but it isn't.

[starpimps]

you and this thread = fail