Question for 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists

originally posted by: firerescue

The President makes a dumb-ass face, and keeps sitting in the classroom!

a reply to: turbonium1

He told chief of staff, Andy Card, to round everybody up and gather a much information as possible - there would be
a meeting in few minutes

Also had staff ready to move , SS told aircrew to warm up air Force and be ready for immediate takeoff

After 7+ more minutes of sitting like a dumb-ass?

And just ignore the problem about how Bush could have seen the first plane hit the tower, right?

a reply to: turbonium1

So you say no damage, fires were not bad and fire proofing would have been ok









Have a read Here

There were major problems with the quality of work done during construction with fireproofing as you can see in link above

When the towers were designed thermal loading was not calculated as thourghly as wind & other structural loads assumptions were made that all changed after 9/11.

Out of the about 10 floors that were impacted by the impact of the aircraft, about 6 floors were occupied by Marsh & McLenan where Paul Bremer worked, who went on to head up the bureaucracy after the invasion of Iraq. Goodness, what a coincidence.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: turbonium1

So you say no damage, fires were not bad and fire proofing would have been ok

Have a read Here

There were major problems with the quality of work done during construction with fireproofing as you can see in link above

When the towers were designed thermal loading was not calculated as thourghly as wind & other structural loads assumptions were made that all changed after 9/11.

So after the two planes punched through the towers, knocked off fireproofing, cut apart massive steel columns, and caused intense fires that completely collapsed the buildings in seconds, there was no evidence found of the planes at all, not even one fragment from 4 dense steel engines?

Simply amazing!

originally posted by: Salander
Out of the about 10 floors that were impacted by the impact of the aircraft, about 6 floors were occupied by Marsh & McLenan where Paul Bremer worked, who went on to head up the bureaucracy after the invasion of Iraq. Goodness, what a coincidence.

So? Your arguments are down to Bush’s bad grammar and innuendo over a senior getting prompted to a more senior position.....

And you totally ignoring physical, audio, and physical evidence?

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: turbonium1

So you say no damage, fires were not bad and fire proofing would have been ok

Have a read Here

There were major problems with the quality of work done during construction with fireproofing as you can see in link above

When the towers were designed thermal loading was not calculated as thourghly as wind & other structural loads assumptions were made that all changed after 9/11.

So after the two planes punched through the towers, knocked off fireproofing, cut apart massive steel columns, and caused intense fires that completely collapsed the buildings in seconds, there was no evidence found of the planes at all, not even one fragment from 4 dense steel engines?

Simply amazing!

Nooooo jet wreckage ever recovered at the WTC? Is that your false argument?

Five minutes of research could have prevented you from looking like a total hack. Just saying.

I see the goal post moving.....

You mean besides the radar data, the eyewitnesses, the video evidence, the DNA evidence and human remains recovered, and the large holes in the towers?

I think firerescue or WMD have repeatedly posted pictures of jet wreckage at the WTC?

Or do you mean the jet engines from flight 175 recovered, on display, and pictured here? en.m.wikipedia.org...

Or at this metabunk thread?
explaining-the-9-11-murray-st-engine-from-flight-175-n612ua-that-hit-wtc2.t9022/
www.metabunk.org...

a reply to: turbonium1

Are you talking about “dense steel engines“ that could be smashed into their 40,000 individual components when crushed and ground by 500,000 tons of falling building? Have there rotor blades fragment when hitting solid objects like steel and concrete?

And still be recognizable after months in a smoldering toxic pile of steam, chemicals, and elevated chemical/corrosion attacks?

a reply to: neutronflux

Nooooo jet wreckage ever recovered at the WTC? Is that your false argument?

The engines being some of the heaviest pieces of the aircraft and constructed of high strength materials often survived
the impacts

United 175 engine on street

i.pinimg.com...

sites.google.com...

aircraft fuselage debris on roof of building in WTC complex

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Lets use out way back machine and go to 1945

One the engines of B 25 which struck Empire state building punched through side of building (solid masonry), through
7 walls, out through other side to land on top of another building 1 1/2 blocks way

Other one landed in elevator shaft

One of the engines and part of the landing gear hurtled across the 79th floor, through wall partitions and two fire walls, and out the south wall's windows to fall onto a 12-story building across 33rd Street.
The other engine flew into an elevator shaft and landed on an elevator car. The car began to plummet, slowed somewhat by emergency safety devices. Miraculously, when help arrived at the remains of the elevator car in the basement, the two women inside the car were still alive.

a reply to: turbonium1


Actually there was photographic evidence of one of the engines continuing on after striking the building, and that engine was found on the sidewalk in the same location as the photographic evidence shows.

Trouble is, the engine is not the one used on the stock 767, it was modified, showing it to be a drone.

a reply to: firerescue


The shot of the engine on the sidewalk was good, but that fuselage on the roof is nonsense.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: turbonium1


Actually there was photographic evidence of one of the engines continuing on after striking the building, and that engine was found on the sidewalk in the same location as the photographic evidence shows.

Trouble is, the engine is not the one used on the stock 767, it was modified, showing it to be a drone.

You mean this engine?
explaining-the-9-11-murray-st-engine-from-flight-175-n612ua-that-hit-wtc2.t9022/

www.metabunk.org...

The thread proves it was the correct engine?

Any more false arguments?

a reply to: Salander

Or more correctly, the extent the Truth movement will hide information to exploit 9/11 for a bit of personal fame and profit.

And you still ignore the eyewitnesses, the video evidence, the radar data, the DNA evidence, and physical evidence.

Funny you never talk about the near mid air collisions of flight 175?

I just leaned this? Something you have never posted about?

Like how the truth movement cherry picks information to create a false and exploitable narrative?

en.m.wikipedia.org...

At around this time, the flight had a near midair collision with Delta Air Lines Flight 2315, reportedly missing the plane by only 300 feet or 90 metres, as air traffic controller Dave Bottiglia frantically tried to tell the Delta pilot to take evasive action. Bottiglia was the first person in the control center to realize that Flight 175 was hijacked when he gave directions for a turn. Flight 175 did not respond, instead accelerating and heading toward the Delta plane. The controller commanded the Delta pilot, "Take any evasive action necessary. We have an airplane that we don't know what he's doing. Any action at all."[15][16] Moments before Flight 175 crashed, it avoided another near collision with Midwest Express Flight 7, which was flying from Milwaukee to New York.[17]

a reply to: Salander

Trouble is, the engine is not the one used on the stock 767, it was modified, showing it to be a drone.

Prove it.

a reply to: turbonium1

Just because you dont't understand the fireproofing of steel structures, the physics of high speed collisions or dynamic loads on a structure doesn't make your claims correct.

From the Empire State Building Collision.

Empire State Building Limestone covered THICK masonry walls, THICK concrete floors and steel frame construction.

Here is a typical floor cross section.



The black squares steel columns NO clear floor space like the Twin Towers.

Floor steel was steel beams not slim trusses, yet a small aircraft 16 ton max take off weight travelling below it's amax speed of 275 mph due to very thick fog did this.

Upon impact, the plane’s jet fuel exploded, filling the interior of the building with flames all the way down to the 75th floor and sending flames out of the hole the plane had ripped open in the building’s side.

It could only carry 975 gallons of fuel.

Some of this sounds familiar from 9/11

While the 78th and 79th floors bore the brunt of the damage, one of the B-25's engines fell down an elevator shaft and set off a major fire in the basement. The other engine hurtled across the building and tore through seven walls before emerging from the 33rd Street side of the tower. The debris crashed through the roof of a thirteen-story building across the street where another fire erupted. Other heavy wreckage, including the landing gear, also caused damage to the Empire State and nearby buildings while Stan Lomax reportedly saw part of a wing catapulting towards Madison Avenue.

or how about this

Gloria Pall worked for the United Service Organization's headquarters on the 56th floor.
"I was at the file cabinet and all of a sudden the building felt like it was just going to topple over," Pall said. "It threw me across the room, and I landed against the wall. People were screaming and looking at each other. We didn't know what to do. We didn't know if it was a bomb or what happened.

Now I am sure I have heard claims of bomb sounds from 9/11 the difference with the above NO interweb/facetube idiots to put a false slant on it

Or how about this

The body of the Navy hitch-hiker Albert Perna was found two days after the crash at the bottom of an elevator shaft

If they had the internet back then no doubt conspiracy nuts would make interesting claims about his body being there.

a reply to: samkent


You would never understand it. If I provided links to PFT with the analysis, you would reject it.

In the end it doesn't matter because the damage has all been done.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: samkent


You would never understand it. If I provided links to PFT with the analysis, you would reject it.

In the end it doesn't matter because the damage has all been done.

Yet other post ignored because you know you can't provide anything to back upyour BS as usual

a reply to: wmd_2008


No WMD, because I know the limitations of certain other posters.

I'm saving keystrokes and broadband.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: samkent


You would never understand it. If I provided links to PFT with the analysis, you would reject it.

In the end it doesn't matter because the damage has all been done.

Or you know it’s been repeatedly debunked with credible and scientific arguments/evidence.

a reply to: Salander

Trouble is, the engine is not the one used on the stock 767, it was modified, showing it to be a drone.

A Drone ?? This is your latest BS ....??

Lets see about drones

GLOBAL HAWK RQ-4

en.wikipedia.org...

Engine 1 × Rolls-Royce F137-RR-100 turbofan engine, 7,600 lbf (34 kN) thrust

Jet airliners use engines of 30-35,000 lb thrust WAY TOO SMALL ......

Strike 1

REAPER MQ-9

en.wikipedia.org...

engine 1 × Honeywell TPE331-10 turboprop, 900 hp (671 kW) with Digital Electronic Engine Control (DEEC)

Wrong type and too small

Strike 2

Predator MQ-1

en.wikipedia.org...

engine 1 × Rotax 914F turbocharged four-cylinder engine, 115 hp[117] (86 kW) (4.8 kW redundant/6.4hp)

Hmm piston engine, Wrong type......

Strike 3

You lose again.........

a reply to: firerescue


The USAF has been flying remotely controlled aircraft, drones, for decades before 911. Anything with the Q designation is a drone.