Still Think the World is Waking up to the Conspiracy?

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: lambros56

And again, you base that on what? Preconceived notions about an event we had never witnessed before.

Nobody in the entire world has witnessed an event like this before as it defies all laws of Physics and common sense!

But TPTB said this is what happened and you HAVE to believe it! BS!!

We do not have to believe a bunch of inbreeds that have constantly lied about everything. That have murdered people just to get their land's resources. Because of 9/11 they invaded Iraq and Afghanistan.

Let's not forget who gained from 9/11 and who lost. The apparent Muslim hijackers did not gain. The people in Iraq and Afghanistan did not gain. So who did? Well the inbreeds that told us we HAVE to believe the Official story!

a reply to: Tedgoat

Laws of Physics?

I do not think that statement means what you think.

No, only YOUR confused understanding is what leads you to think the laws of physics were "defied"

Common sense?

Based on what? When I arrived home and watched the video my wife had recorded, I was amazed that the Towers stood as long as they did.

Your hatred of "TPTB" leads you to ignoring reality of that day.

Your comment about the hijackers did not "gain" proves that you do not have the first idea of the motivation behind suicide attackers.

In other words, your flawed understanding of the events of that day and the motivations of Muslim terrorists, is what leads you to your mistaken views.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

When I arrived home and watched the video my wife had recorded, I was amazed that the Towers stood as long as they did.

Really? No-one else expected them to come down. Especially not all the firefighters and rescue workers who raced in to save peoples lives. So what gave you that extraordinary presentiment?

originally posted by: lambros56

Okay....I'll give you TWO seconds......
It still wouldn't happen. It's too fast.

Again, what is your source for your claim, and how long do you think it should have taken, and why?

a reply to: Flatcoat

Wrong. Watch some of the news reports from that day. The possibility of the buildings collapsing, was discussed. And, NYPD aerial units were reporting they thought the buildings were going to collapse as well.

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Flatcoat

Wrong. Watch some of the news reports from that day. The possibility of the buildings collapsing, was discussed. And, NYPD aerial units were reporting they thought the buildings were going to collapse as well.

Once the first one went talk would turn to others falling.

a reply to: roadgravel

It was BEFORE the first collapse that the talk started.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Oh I'm sorry you feel that I am

confused

and I am

ignoring reality of that day

.

And Vice Versa for

In other words, your flawed understanding of the events of that day and the motivations of Muslim terrorists, is what leads you to your mistaken views.

Do we have to say Muslim Terrorists? Why can't we say American, Saudi and Israeli Terrorists? The apparent Terrorist attack has nothing to do with religion just as the current ISIS attack on Syria and Iraq has nothing to do with religion!

The motive for 9/11 was as plain as the end of your nose. Resources! And to grab the resources of other countries in the middle east (As detailed in the PNAC) and to create the never ending 'War On Terror' farce!

The blame as we saw for 9/11 was put onto Iraq. They of course had NOTHING to do with it. TPTB used this and the WMD's Lie as the excuse to rape Iraq of it's resources and send it's people into chaos ready for Israel to eventually assimilate Iraq into it's 'Greater Israel' land grab project along with what's left of Palestine and Syria.

The accused Hijackers were mostly from Saudi Arabia with some of them who apparently died in the hijacked planes actually being found alive later on. I think it was 7 out of the 19 hijackers that were actually still alive.

You obviously don't have a clue as to what is going on and why. You believe only what you are told to believe and cannot think for yourself when it comes to 'Common Sense'.

It's not Rocket Science to see what is really going on and to see the flaws in the Official Story!

originally posted by: Tedgoat
with some of them who apparently died in the hijacked planes actually being found alive later on. I think it was 7 out of the 19 hijackers that were actually still alive.

Oh dear, why do you keep posting that silly story?
www.911myths.com...

For more details, see our analyses of the most common "still alive" stories: Mohamed Atta still alive? Mohand al-Shehri still alive? Salem al-Hazmi still alive? Ahmed al-Nami still alive? Khalid al-Mihdhar still alive? Abdulaziz al-Omari still alive? Saeed al-Ghamdi still alive? Wail al-Shehri still alive? Waleed al-Shehri still alive? And then ask yourself how such a flimsy theory could be accepted by such a large group of people. Google "confirmation bias" for one possible explanation, but in the meantime the reality is the "still alive" stories have very little support, certainly not enough to be reported as definitive fact. In our view a "mistaken identity" explanation makes far more sense for most of these cases, once you look at all evidence involved.

a reply to: hellobruce

Oh Dear! Why do you continue to repeat the Official Fairy Narrative?

a reply to: Tedgoat

And you are incredibly ignorant of reality. And like most, it is easy to see where you get your misinformation.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: lambros56

Okay....I'll give you TWO seconds......
It still wouldn't happen. It's too fast.

Again, what is your source for your claim, and how long do you think it should have taken, and why?

The towers came down in less than fifteen seconds.
That's less than a second and a half for every ten floors.....

originally posted by: Tedgoat
a reply to: hellobruce

Oh Dear! Why do you continue to repeat the Official Narrative?

Care to dispute it with facts?

originally posted by: lambros56
The towers came down in less than fifteen seconds.

Not really....

NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NIST NCSTAR 1-5A). As documented in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, these collapse times show that: “The structure below the level of collapse initiation offered minimal resistance to the falling building mass at and above the impact zone. The potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass far exceeded the capacity of the intact structure below to absorb that energy through energy of deformation. Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall, as seen in videos. As the stories below sequentially failed, the falling mass increased, further increasing the demand on the floors below, which were unable to arrest the moving mass.” In other words, the momentum (which equals mass times velocity) of the 12 to 28 stories (WTC 1 and WTC 2, respectively) falling on the supporting structure below (which was designed to support only the static weight of the floors above and not any dynamic effects due to the downward momentum) so greatly exceeded the strength capacity of the structure below that it (the structure below) was unable to stop or even to slow the falling mass. The downward momentum felt by each successive lower floor was even larger due to the increasing mass. From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.

www.nist.gov...

Yes. The Towers collapsed at Freefall speed. Same as dropping a Billiard ball through air from the same height. Just as if the floors below were never there.

Does that not defy the Laws of Physics? Of course it does!

The Towers collapsed symmetrically and straight down through the greatest path of resistance. So it would have been impossible for them to collapse when there was resistance. But not impossible if that resistance was taken away!

Just like WTC-7 which was an all too obvious Demolition and is the key to what happened to WTC-1 and 2.

Sheesh!

And once again I see the Official Fairy Story repeated above!


The NIST report is not FACT!

a reply to: hellobruce



The floors around the core columns fell in less than fifteen seconds.

a reply to: Tedgoat

public-action.com...

Click on the link. The chunks of building, are falling at "free fall speed" if you notice, the Tower is not.

a reply to: lambros56

You have no accurate way to judge that. The dust cloud obscured the bottom 700 feet of the Towers when they collapsed. You have absolutely NO idea how it was progressing inside the cloud.

originally posted by: Tedgoat
Yes. The Towers collapsed at Freefall speed. Same as dropping a Billiard ball through air from the same height.

Have you even bothered to watch a video of the towers collapsing? As if you had watched a video you would have seen the debris that fell off the tower fell at free fall speed, the tower collapse was obviously slower!

Does that not defy the Laws of Physics? Of course it does!

So exactly Law of Physics did it defy?

So it would have been impossible for them to collapse when there was resistance.

Exactly what do you base that silly statement on?

You seem to have no clue at all how things work.

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: lambros56

You have no accurate way to judge that. The dust cloud obscured the bottom 700 feet of the Towers when they collapsed. You have absolutely NO idea how it was progressing inside the cloud.

Why....are you telling me the building stopped or slowed down...?
This is all new to me.

How many seconds....in your view, did it take for the " collapse " to reach ground level ?
Because even at twenty two seconds it would still mean ten floors every two seconds.....too fast.