And you work for who? Lol, you are in charge of keeping my terra safe and your posting secrets on public sites?

I don' t know who they are hiring, but this doesn't mean we wouldn't like to know things that could be true. Let me decide, I can distinguish fact from fiction very well.

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
And you work for who? Lol, you are in charge of keeping my terra safe and your posting secrets on public sites?

I am posting facts and evidence i find as to what happened that day from research i have been doing.

My work involves supporting our troops. What do you do to support our troops?

Exactly what your doing. I have a cousin who just left and a friend in Iraq right now. what could I possibly do? Except hope it all ends.

There is much more you can do than me, and hope u do what you have to do

[edit on 3/26/2007 by StreetCorner Philosopher]

Originally posted by Midwest Agenda

Originally posted by Insolubrious
In short I would say its a proximity effect or a side effect of the 'sophisticated' explosive devices used to annihilate the towers. They have been exposed to extreme temperatures.

If by 'sophisticated', you mean Boeing aircraft then, yeah thats exactly what it was.

The thruth-goofers should stop claiming so many things brought down the towers and try to focus on one fantasy at a time.

They have put forward:

-explosives
-holograms
-space beams
-remote controlled airplanes
- pilots under hipnotic transes
-missiles

Talk about a conspiracy with A.D.D....focus people...F O C U S.

M.Agenda!

Why would a guy from the NSA be doing research on this then?

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
Why would a guy from the NSA be doing research on this then?

Because i want to find the truth of what happened that day. Because of my education and experience along with some common sence i have seen to many things wrong with the official story.

well, your at the right place. we definatly were duped. But don't worry. our veterans of tomorrow will be rewarded more than past veterans from past wars. Good luck, keep us posted.

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
well, your at the right place. we definatly were duped. But don't worry. our veterans of tomorrow will be rewarded more than past veterans from past wars. Good luck, keep us posted.

So do you have evidence to support the official story ?

I would like to see the FBI and NTSB crime scene reports if you have them, because without them we do have the facts of what happened that day. So what you believe happened is just a theory.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Well let me give you my background.

I was a Crew Chief in the Air Force and have knowledge of aviation.

I was a Federal Police officer at NSA and have knowledge of emergency incident management.

I am now a data analysist at NSA with the Office of Weapons and space.

I have done a lot of research trying to find the truth about what happened that day, so far i have found very little evidence or facts to support the official story.

I have found facts and evidence to support what i post, where would you like me to start ?

Ohh Boy, here we go. Excuse me while I put my hip waders on. You want to know something? If I had a penny for every time a 9/11 conspiracy theorist claimed to be a cop, FBI agent, engineer, high ranking military officer, NSA agent, or a myriad of other things just to try and gain the upper hand in a debate by inflating their credentials I would be a millionaire. By the way, if you were an NSA agent you would have enough education to know how to spell the word analyst.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

I am posting facts and evidence i find as to what happened that day from research i have been doing.

My work involves supporting our troops. What do you do to support our troops?

Hmmm…you are supporting the troops are you? I thought the official position of the “Bush demolished the towers” crowd was that 9/11 had nothing to do with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

You aren’t supporting the troops! You are an instrument in the lunatic lefts crusade against the troops and against the United States!

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Because i want to find the truth of what happened that day. Because of my education and experience along with some common sence i have seen to many things wrong with the official story.

Hey Mr. Professor, you spelled the word sense wrong. It’s good to know smart chaps like you work for the NSA. No wonder our intelligence services suck!

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

So do you have evidence to support the official story ?

I would like to see the FBI and NTSB crime scene reports if you have them, because without them we do have the facts of what happened that day. So what you believe happened is just a theory.

And what you believe holds more water? Give me a break! I’m still waiting for this “evidence” you say you have based upon your “research” and expert knowledge of science and engineering that the events of 9/11 were, in fact, a result of the U.S. government’s nefarious activities.





[edit on 26-3-2007 by MooneyBravo]

Originally posted by MooneyBravo
Ohh Boy, here we go. Excuse me while I put my hip waders on. You want to know something? If I had a penny for every time a 9/11 conspiracy theorist claimed to be a cop, FBI agent, engineer, high ranking military officer, NSA agent, or a myriad of other things just to try and gain the upper hand in a debate by inflating their credentials I would be a millionaire. By the way, if you were an NSA agent you would have enough education to know how to spell the word analyst.

Well i can post documents to prove my background and education. Would you like to see my transcripts from the military and the National Cryptologic School ?

Can you post your transcrpts ?

[edit on 26-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

If you do work for the government, you should know that those documents are more than likely bieng used in ongoing investigations and cannot release the actual "crime scene documents". You know that they have performed an extensive investigation based on the link I provided.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1


Well i can post documents to prove my background and education. Would you like to see my transcripts from the military and the National Cryptologic School ?

Can you post your transcrpts ?

You've been reading Dan Rather's book again haven't you? Forging Documents for Dummies

It's hilarious that you still fail to post your alleged proof that Bush was behind 9/11 as you continue to skirt the issue at hand.

Well I hate to be a party pooper, but can we get back to the original thought of this thread.

What would have caused all the damage to the vehicles. Was it just falling burning debris as some here think, or is there something else involved something that would cause a byproduct of incinerate/vaporize trucks and cars?



What was it that had enough force to push the door skin of this Truck/SUV in.


[edit on 26/3/2007 by Sauron]

Originally posted by MooneyBravo
Ohh, by the way, I am an engineer and a scientist.

So, scientifically and using engineering priciples, you have been able to prove the official story? I think NIST owes you some money. BTW, I am also a civil engineer with structural emphasis. Does that make me any more of an expert than you? I say no. But, that also doesn't make you any more of an expert than me. Can I ask, what type of engineering?

Sauron, you only need to google WTC auto pics and you will see the autos that were at ground zero, and the damage that occured. 600 FDNY vehicels alone were destroyed in the attacks.

Originally posted by Sauron
I am swayed by Mr. Twietmeyer's analogy that the damage appears to be caused by advanced weapon technology.
You can repeatably see tires, steering wheels, engines and interiors that look to be vaporized. I just don't see how any falling burning chunks of debris could create the energy to do that amount of damage.

Ted is often incredibly incorrect on basic aspects of engineering. His current employ is as a lab assistant. I hear all the other stuff he claims, but given some of his gaffes (did you know that metal detectors use x-rays?) I just can't buy some of his credentials.

That said, some of the things he's claiming as "proof" of a "magnetic pulse" are bogus as well.

Consider: how many electronic devices stopped? If Twiet's "pulse" was so great that it burned cars, how were there so many MAGNETICALLY TAPED images? How many camcorder shots of the entire sequence are there? What about all the communications equipment that never stopped functioning? What about all the power in Manhattan that didn't go down? How many cell phones in the building after the strike still worked?

Twiet's right about the power level that would be required to cause such damage, at least grossly right, it would take billions of Watts to do that, but the pulse wouldn't conveniently stop there. The pulse would have caused gross damage to electronics all over Manhattan and upsets all over the NYC area. It did not.

This is a negative from above, maybe I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill who knows.
The damage of this door is what makes me think there had to be some real intense heat more than burning debris could create, What had the power to hammer this door skin in. It almost looks molded (IMO)



Edit
Thanks Tom Bedlam, your opinion and information is greatly appreciated,


[edit on 26/3/2007 by Sauron]

Sauron:

Do you accept that the cars in the lot and piled on each other on the side of the road there were towed into place to clear out the immediate area around the buildings?

That's what it looks like to me. I don't have a dog in the hunt one way or the other. If you have the cars burning seven blocks away then I can't figure out why.

If they were burning in the immediate area around the building(s), then I can sort of see it.

The physical damage...are there photos that show both sides of the same damaged vehicles? Are they only crushed on one side and the top? If you knew that it would help. I can see debris coming from two sources - immediate impact debris from the planes hitting (let's posit that and not death beams or whatever) and knocking crap off the building, which would primarily crush down. I would guess you could get SOME stuff bouncing along the ground but I'd sort of expect any prompt debris to fall straight down and stick, causing top surface damage and/or downward crushing.

When the collapse happens, I could see debris coming OUTWARD, in which case I would expect varying degrees of lateral impact damage, but typically only on one side. I guess you could have the cars being hit so hard they slid sideways and struck another object but I would expect the primary side damage to be only on one side from debris flying outward laterally during the collapse phase. Think of it as an inverted mushroom cloud.

During the collapse I could see some of the unburned fuel that had come down the center of the building being forced out at ground level in a spray. I'm not sure about that though. I don't think from the videos that a lot of the burning fuel from the strike itself would have reached the ground before burning up. But I don't know if fires erupted around the building base either, after the collapse. If so, there's your answer.

All of the video I've seen has been of the towers being hit and not so much of what it looked like in the immediate area around the base of the tower during the collapse.

So just looking at it I would say that damage probably happened in two parts, mechanical impact from flying debris causing the dents and crushing, which you would expect, and some other event that ignited the cars. I could buy some of them igniting from their own ruptured gas tanks after the crush damage but some of them don't look that grossly torn up, just burned.

Re-looking the photos in the first two pages, you can see several instances of where it appears the cars were partially splashed with something from above that was on fire - the first shot of a police car for example. It looks like the front end was doused with something that ran down the sides part way and down the front all the way. The front tires were burnt off but not the back ones.

I'm thinking some sort of flammable liquid here, landing on the cars from above. If there's enough that it flows to the ground and gets on the tires, yes, they will burn too.

The only thing that makes me scratch my head, and it may have been lost in the towing operation, is that I can't see the tire cords from any of the burnt tires.

When you burn a tire, it generally leaves this rat's nest of wire. All the wheel shots of burned tires are free of this, which I don't get. But like I say, they may have all fallen off when they were towed/dragged away.