Thank you DGTempe for posting that article. I agree with Mr. Bell. Flame me all you want, but I can tell you one thing. Not one of us here is a structural engineer OR a firefighter. Go on believing what you want to believe and spewing the same crappola, this sounds like the exact opposit of the Clinton "death list" conspiracy. Or that Pearl Harbor was allowed to be attacked ..... Concoted purely for political purposes.

Now back to reality of Bush bankrupting the USA and stripping away civil liberties. Don't waste time or effort on this, you'll just frustrate yourselves. There are many other battles that need to be fought, lets not go create an imaginary one mmkay

[edit on 7-3-2005 by sardion2000]

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar


Are you the same HowardRoark who on the previous page suggested that attacking the messenger was not a decent way to argue? My, you have changed in a few short hours.

Not really. You have not proven that the authors of the PM article posted any factual inacuracies. The credibility of the authors has not been proven to be suspect.

I could easily do that with Bollyn's writings.

I have read many of his articles and I have yet to find one without a serious factual error or an obvious slant to it.

(OK, maybe it was a bit of an attack on Bollyn, but he has not proven himself to be accurate so far, why should I start to believe him now?)

Besides, like I said, the PM article directly contradicts one of the myths created by Bollyn himself, the seismic data myth.


If what antipigopolist says is true then it certainly fits the Bollyn modus operandi.

Originally posted by antipigopolist
Christopher Bollyn of American Free Press called Ben's mother and asked if their is any relation. She said he MIGHT be a distant cousin but she did not know for sure. Ben has never met or spoken to Michael Chertoff. Christopher Bollyn spun this info to read direct cousin.

antipigopolist - do you have a link to this?




[edit on 7-3-2005 by HowardRoark]

Syntaxer, you are aware, aren't you, that the Windsor tower is nothing like the WTC?

You do realize that the Windsor tower had reinforced concrete core columns, don't you?

Did you know that the WTC buildings did not use concrete columns?

You do know that the WTC was three times taller and much more massive then the Windsor tower, don't you?

You have seen how the WTC floors were four times the size of the Windsor tower floors, haven't you?

BTW, if you look at those pictures you posted, you can clearly see how the exterior steel beems were softening and deforming under the heat of the fire.

Too bad they didn't have any jet fuel in the Windsor tower to cool the fire off.
{sarcasm}'Cause you know how jet fuel fires can't burn hotter that 250 degrees C!{/sarcasm}

[edit on 7-3-2005 by HowardRoark]

[edit on 7-3-2005 by HowardRoark]

Just face it, our country was attacked by extreme islamic terrorists. Sometimes you guys get to carried away with these conspiracy theories. The fact is that innocent people have died, and will continue to die until we do something about it. And that is what our great president is doing.

Instead of making this country look bad, you should be a real patriot and never forget what happend on that day. It was not the government, although some agendas may have been aided by this disaster. If anyone is truly to blame, it is the security personel of the Clinton Administration. They knew something was coming, and they could have done something about it.

Don't you guys remember the U.S.S Cole, or the U.S Embassy bombings. THeses were all foreshadowing 9/11. Clinton did nothing except launch 6 cruise missiles into the desert and claim the issue was resolved. That man spent more time getting oral pleasure from his intern than even thinking about terrorism. Wake up and smell the coffee, it is not Bush fault that it happend. Most importantly, I think we should continue to take out our possible threats.

This is a world where it is either us, or them, and I'd rather be the one left standing.

Whether you believe the PM side of the story that meats catastropic stuctural failure or that the buildings were destroyed post plane insertion, you are missing the details that the Bush cartel don't want you to focus on. Why did'nt they heed the Clinton Adms. warnings about these terrorist cells. Golf, SDI, brush clearing, Iraq, vacations, Privitizing everything. Warnings of planes being used with enough info to have improved security of the Airports, planes and airspace. Final warnings come in days before that were ignored, all documented. They (DC) knew airplanes were going to be used for something possibly to rid NYC of Rich Democrats and their businesses there who knows.

Physics: The towers did fall due to fires, construction method and the damage at the upper third of the stucture. An explosion below would have send dust and smoke from the lower floors and totaly changes the collapse dynamics. You would have seen the entire building at once show signs of internal failure through the lower windows and espesially that two story open lobby. The Madrid case is of a building of standrard beam contruction. The fire consumed the upper floors, steel and all reducing the weight above the fire. WTC1&2 had multiple untouched floors above the inferno.

It's getting so hard to believe anything anymore, it looks like they have most people where they want them. Chasing conspieracies the the government takes away our freedom, health and welfare for their personal little kingdoms. This is'nt new either, this govenment lied about things all along. People have been used for test animals to test vacines, bio-weapons, radiation and psycologial programming. The media is controlled, all these high profile court drama cases are for your entertainment to keep peoples minds off of the attrocities being commited by the administraion, it's blunderings and the empire it's building for it's cronies. By 2020 I doubt that the constitution will exist beyond owning a gun(s), but I would'nt be supprised to see them about face on that one also.

In the next election we need to see 90% voter turnout, we can't sit idly by and let someone else make the decision for us. We here the talk about Democracy on a daily basis around the world, lets see Democracy here for a change.

Edit: Not the message above was not posted when I started to write this one but it was there by the time I posted 45 mins after I clickes the reply.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by AlabamaCajun]

Originally posted by omega1
Just face it, our country was attacked by extreme islamic terrorists.

And why was that allowed to happen, and who has been held accountable for the most monumental lapse in national security in all of American history?

Your brushing this under the carpet is not conducive to the welfare of the country at all, quite the opposite. The buck stops with the incumbent administration, and truly innocent people want answers and accountability.

I am so tired of this debate about 911: America had no valid reason under UN law to go to war with Iraq, as the intelligence reports all but admitted that: no WMD. The UN did not want America to go to Iraq. America went. The Bush Admin met with the Taliban 1 month prior to 911 to discuss an Oil pipe that would run through Afghanistan through to Asia to quench their thirst for oil. The Taliban refused the conditions and then the WTC and Iraq happened. Bush's family has an oil history; Condelezza Rice was the manager of Chevron; Cheney in the same ranks. Look at the videos regarding 911; the plane has something under its belly, presumably a missle. There is a laser light that shines upon the North Tower just before impact. There is also a bright flash just before and just as the plane hits the North Tower. Witnesses heard explosions inside the building after the plane had hit, sometime after actually (below) The flight list does not contain the names of the terrorists supposedly on the planes. Apparently a passport was found in the wreckage! After all that fire. The FBI had a list of names published in the media 1 day later. If they could get names that fast, why couldn't they deploy NORAD in like fashion? Where the hell was NORAD? The plane that hit the pentagon was flying around for over 1 hour before it hit. In some videos, you can see explosions shattering parts of the WTC's walls well below the crash site. Firemen said it was like a demolition on film, who were at the scene. How could some hacks with box cutters take over a whole plane, a plane where in some cases, the pilots were ex-military? The insurance claim on that building was huge, and the ownership changed hands shortly before the collapse. The buildings were in dire need of renovations. Thus, there are major problems with the Governments story of heat collapsing the building, especially when you factor in that video of the guy waving his shirt out the window very close to the crash site, just before the building collapsed! If it were that hot, he would have been dead. Further to the melting temperatures, the "jet fuel" (NT) exploded outside the building, not inside, so this fact takes away even more from there being hot temperatures inside. Further, there is the motive of insurance claims, manufacturing fear in the American people, and instigating a hatred toward the muslim world, as well as oil interests.

Money, power, greed; money, power, greed; money, power, greed; money, power, greed...

[edit on 8-3-2005 by freudling]

Originally posted by freudling
America had no valid reason under UN law to go to war with Iraq

America needs no permission from the UN to protect itself and it
needs no permission from the UN to rescue people from terrorist
regimes. (Ref - Clinton's actions in the Balkins a few years ago -
no UN permission, but getting rid of SLOBO was the right thing to do)
However, resolution 1441 covers it just fine.

The UN is NOT in charge of the world. It thinks it is,
but it isn't. And as far as 'UN LAW' , don't try to say
that the war is 'illegal'. That's a joke. War is war.
It just happens and there is nothing legal about
any war.

The Coalition of the Willing, all 45 nations, agreed that the
UN was wrong and that the best thing for the world and
for the Iraqi people was to get rid of Saddam. They were
right.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by freudling
America had no valid reason under UN law to go to war with Iraq

America needs no permission from the UN to protect itself and it
needs no permission from the UN to rescue people from terrorist
regimes. (Ref - Clinton's actions in the Balkins a few years ago -
no UN permission, but getting rid of SLOBO was the right thing to do)
However, resolution 1441 covers it just fine.

The UN is NOT in charge of the world. It thinks it is,
but it isn't. And as far as 'UN LAW' , don't try to say
that the war is 'illegal'. That's a joke. War is war.
It just happens and there is nothing legal about
any war.

The Coalition of the Willing, all 45 nations, agreed that the
UN was wrong and that the best thing for the world and
for the Iraqi people was to get rid of Saddam. They were
right.

and how was it the best thing???

Considering there are way worse people in the world than Saddam to deal with.. you know like the Bush admin, and all these crazy new laws they are soming out with...

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar

Originally posted by omega1
Just face it, our country was attacked by extreme islamic terrorists.

And why was that allowed to happen, and who has been held a
ccountable for the most monumental lapse in national security in
all of American history?

Clinton dropped the ball. He had 8 years to take care of things but
he just threw bombs at asprin factories and empty tents every time
he got Lewinskied. Clinton decimated the US military and Intelligence.
HE should be held accountable for his part in weakening America but
of course he won't be... and his wifeypoo will probably be elected in
2008 and her first target will no doubt be to further weaken the US
military and intelligence communities. She'll try to finish the job her
hubby started. God help us all.

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
and how was it the best thing???

The people of Iraq are VERY happy. Read the blogs from
Iraq. They are free, they are speaking out, and they are
VERY happy!

Well, syntaxer, you missed my point. Given that the floor plan of the WTC was at least 4 times bigger than the Windsor towers, you could have very easily had an inferno just as intense or even more burning in the core areas of the WTC. You just can't t ell from the picture.

There was plenty of pathways for oxygen to feed the fires from the core shafts and such, especially since many of them were breached by the impact.


Furthermore, the structural design of the WTC was nothing like the windsor towers. Nothing. So is is totally impossible to compare the resonse of one struture to a fire with the response of a different structure.

FlyersFan:

Well, Mr. Warmonger, apparently the Geneva and Hogue Conventions do not apply to the United States, even though they ratified themselves to them some time ago. I guess the World Court, part of the UN, does not apply to the USA.

Functions of the Court

The Court has a dual role: to settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted to it by States, and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized international organs and agencies.

The court can deal with member states of the UN. The US is a member of the UN. However, they are not a party of the ICC treaty, and they have essentially made themselves exempt from WC jurisdiction, but any infringements on the Hague and Geneva Conventions they are responsible for, since they are a ratified party to them.

[edit on 8-3-2005 by freudling]

The PM article has nothing to do with the 911 commission. It has to do with debunking stupid myths.

Myths based in ignorance and scientific iliteracy.

All Popular Mechanics did was to point out how the myths fall apart when you know a little bit about science and technology.