Besides, you have not demonstrated that these witnesses "saw and heard somethign very different" from what the gov't saying.
That quote speaks volumes.
What I find interesting is that 22 short minutes after making the above statement you demand that someone else do what you are unwilling to do.
Your hypocrisy has been noted.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Every video of the collapse in existence shows the towers collapsed sequentially down floor by floor, not every third floor, and this cannot be refuted.
Originally posted by GoodOlDaveThere were FEMA rescue workers deployed to New York for a bioterror drill on 9/12 . Strange co-incidence.
Would you mind terribly posting somethign to back this up? This would have been one day after the attack, and I can guarantee everyone's attention was exclusively on the 9/11 attack, not on any bioterror drill.
"... the reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill, it had hundreds of people here, from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State, from the State Emergency Management Office, and they were getting ready for a drill for biochemical attack..."
Kurt Sonnenfeld: There were many things, in hindsight, that were disturbing at Ground Zero. It was odd to me that I was dispatched to go to New York even before the second plane hit the South Tower, while the media was still reporting only that a “small plane” had collided with the North Tower — far too small of a catastrophe at that point to involve FEMA. FEMA was mobilized within minutes, whereas it took ten days for it to deploy to New Orleans to respond to Hurricane Katrina, even with abundant advance warning! It was odd to me that all cameras were so fiercely prohibited within the secured perimeter of Ground Zero, that the entire area was declared a crime scene and yet the “evidence” within that crime scene was so rapidly removed and destroyed. And then it was very odd to me when I learned that FEMA and several other federal agencies had already moved into position at their command center at Pier 92 on September 10th, one day before the attacks!
Originally posted by GoodOlDaveGWB was in an elementary school in Florida reading "My pet goat" to school children during the attack.. Didn't you watch "Fahrenheit 9/11"?
[Bush] said yesterday: "I saw an airplane hit the tower - the TV was obviously on - and I used to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a horrible accident.'"
Originally posted by GoodOlDaveNo, no, no. If they have twelve time their own weight above then the columns are designed to hold forty eight times the weight above.The buildings fell at nearly free fall speed. They were engineered to be four times stronger than they needed to be to stand up – they were no house of cards.
The initial collapse began at the ninety-somethingth floor, and the towers had 110 stories. This means the floor that first collapsed was hit with at least TWELVE times its own weight, and each floor below it was hit by exponentially greater weight as each floor fell in turn.
Nonetheless, there are mountains of evidence from reports, photographs, interviews, eyewitness accounts, and not to mention logic and critical analysis, that show the events of 9/11 occurred the way they all say it did.
If you don't agree with the findings then yes, it IS your responsibility to prove why it's wrong, and moreover, it's likewise your responsibility to provide an alternative scenario that better fits the facts.
I'm afraid I'm going to need a little bit more than your simply saying "I'm wrong" before running away giggling.
This is because almost to a man, all the truthers do is mindlessly repeat the exact same crap they find on these internet sites almost word for word, over and over.
I've already looked at all those "dozen web sites with credible witnesses" you're referring to, and I know full well they're full of sh*t. They're either deliberately misrepresenting what the witnesses are actually saying (I.E. claiming witnesses heard explosives going off when they were almost certainly flammable objects going off as the fires reached them), dropping innuendo (Bush's five degrees of separation away from the Nazis. Good grief, all that happened before Bush was even born), making unprovable statements
almost certainly flammable objects going off
Good grief, all that happened before Bush was even born), making unprovable statements ("unreleased reports" quoting "anonymous sources" saying Bin Laden "may" have died of Kidney disease),
artfully quote mining people out of context (I.E. Silverstein's "Pull it", which obviously meant to get the firefighters out of the building
or putting out bald faced, flat out lies
lies (I.E. fighter planes were orderd to stand down, despite fighters being seen flying over the skies of NYC only minutes after the attack).
Thus, when I say the evidence shows the truthers are being conned by these stupid conspiracy web sites,
Originally posted by impressme
Humm… you are joking right? So your logic is better than science?
The fact is you will not look at the science that proves the government is lying about everything and you have been shown.
However, ignoring scientific evidences doesn’t make it wrong. How can anyone show you proof of anything when you have made it very clear that you do not want to see it. Dose the fear of our government being involved in 911 really frighten you so bad, that it is better for you to close the door on that possibility without ever looking at the true evidences.
Wow, so firemen and police officers who saw and heard something different and despite the fact that they were put under gag orders still spoke out risking everything, their jobs, careers and reputations, so you are saying these brave men and women are full of it?
Almost certainly?
Do you have absolute proof that Ben Laden did not die of Kidney disease?
You do not know what Larry Silverstein meant; nor do you know what that man was thinking. You can only “assume” nothing more.
Really, can you supply a link for this information besides your opinions show us some sources that it was only *minutes after the attack* because I don’t recall see any F16, or F18 flying over NYC in any of the News videos.
Originally posted by P1DrummerBoy
No..but isn't it impossible for an office fire??
1800 degrees F is hotter than jet fuel burns right? Doesnt jetfuel burn at a max of about 1500F? And office fires don't get nearly that hot.
Unless you are suggesting that, instead of burning off in the initial impact, that the jet fuel was splashed all over the bare steel columns, then set on fire to burn through them...
In any case, you are 'taking it to mean', not, it DOES mean. Could you verify for me, since I'm not very educated in fires, the temperature of an office fire, and the temperature of jet fuel burning? Also, could you show me how burning jetfuel could sustain a fire long enough to cause the collapse?
Humm… you are joking right? So your logic is better than science?
In that context, I am referring to the fact that logic says...
-it's impossible for anyone to plant controlled demolitions in a heavily populated building without any of the tens of thousands of occupants noticing.
-Any controlled demolitions/thermite/whatever would leave blatant after effects on all the wreckage that would be immediately noticable during the cleanup, regardless of the method of sabotage.
-conspirators that already have the resources to commandeer multiple passenger jets to be used as weapons aren't going to waste their time shooting a cruise missile at the Pentagon in front of hundreds of witnesses and manufacture all kinds of fake wreckage and disinformation to make it look like another passenger jet. They're simply going to commandeer another passenger jet
-conspirators aren't going to go through the trouble of faking evidence of a plane crash in Pennsylvania only to turn around and cover up the evidence they planted.
-Not to mention, any outer space energy weapons powerful enough to disintergrate a building would also disintergrate all the people in the vicinity too.
Just what science do you have that refutes this?
No, the fact is that all your "science" is completely junk science.
If, for example you believe the towers fell too fast, simply calculating out how fast it fell is irrelevent.
It's also your obligation to show how fast the towers *should* have fallen, given the specific construction and specific damage inflicted on it, or else you haven't proven how fast "too fast" is. Is throwing a baseball at 200MPH fast? Is a man walking ten feet per minute too slow? You won't know unless you know how fast a baseball can be thrown or how fast a man can walk.
So, since you say science backs your claims up, tell me how fast the towers should have fallen.
I've stated many times that I've *already* seen your supposed evidence many times from prior discussions with other truthers so I *already* know your own material better than you do,
Besides, it is YOU who openly admitted that you don't care what anyone says, you're still going to believe what you want to believe, not me. Do you want me to quote your own words back to you?
Give me an example of a fireman/police officer who "saw and heard something different".
Explosive Testimony: Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories
"[T]here was just an explosion [in the south tower]. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions."--Firefighter Richard Banaciski
"I saw a flash flash flash [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?"
--Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory
"[I]t was [like a] professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."
--Paramedic Daniel Rivera
The above quotations come from a collection of 9/11 oral histories that, although recorded by the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) at the end of 2001, were publicly released only on August 12, 2005. Prior to that date, very few Americans knew the content of these accounts or even the fact that they existed.
Why have we not known about them until recently? Part of the answer is that the city of New York would not release them until it was forced to do so. Early in 2002, the New York Times requested copies under the freedom of information act, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration refused. So the Times, joined by several families of 9/11 victims, filed suit. After a long process, the city was finally ordered by the New York Court of Appeals to release the records (with some exceptions and redactions allowed). Included were oral histories, in interview form, provided by 503 firefighters and medical workers.1 (Emergency Medical Services had become a division within the Fire Department.2) The Times then made these oral histories publicly available.3
The buildings definitely had flammable objects (I.E. fuel tanks, electrical transformers, etc) like every OTHER large building does, which would definitely blow up as the fires reached them, and there definitely was a fire burning in the buildings, so it means people would definitely hear explosions, the longer the fires burned. Thus, it's almost certainly what they heard becuase they definitely would have heard it sooner or later.
Silverstein's office released a statement as a reponse to all these "pull it" accusations floating around the Internet specifically explaining that "Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building." So yes, I DO know what he meant and what he was thinking.
CDI: 'Pull It' Means 'Pull It Down'
For those who still question what Larry Silverstein meant when he said "pull it" when talking about the collapse of the WTC 7, Jeff from PumpItOut.com called demolition experts Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) and asked them what "pull it" means in demolition terms. This is what CDI told him:
Click here to listen to conversation
So yes, I DO know what he meant and what he was thinking.
I've already stated a dozen times over that such information can be found in the 9/11 commission report
BUT, if you are really that deathly afraid of reading the report and seeing the conspiracy-crushing information it contains, CNN caught them on camera, too. The twin tails means it's an F-15 fighter.
...and being an F-15, it means we know which base it came from
but I'm not going to tell you how I know that.
What say you actually do your OWN research for a change, instead of simply just repeating what you read on some damned fool conspiracy web site and then calling it "research"?
By now, you should realize I am not here to coddle your beloved conspiracy stories.
I am here to post the facts of 9/11 that you've painfully demonstrated that you didn't know.
but do not insult my intelligence
and claim how there are "so many unanswered questions"
9/11 Widows Keep on Asking the Tough Questions
Jersey Girls Survive Attacks, Continue To Press For Truth About 9/11
Right sets attack dogs on Jersey Girl widows
You're simply choosing to ignore the answers you don't want to hear.
Originally posted by thedman It is not necessary for every part of the structure to fail in order to bringIf this is true than we need to halt the building of all high rise structures right now - they are just too flimsy and dangerous to occupy. One kink, one fire, major or minor, and they all fall down. How could we have been so stupid? But of course builders worldwide carry on with their constructions without giving any credence whatsoever to the structural aspects of the collapses of Sept 11. Odd behaviour if the govt story is indeed true.
building down..
Originally posted by thedman
Think of it as row of dominoes - one domino topples knocking down...
Originally posted by Swampfox46: Osama Bin Laden is an invention of the CIA? I will bet that that is a surprise to his family....Im guessing that you didnt think that through.
I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States....
Originally posted by Swampfox46:
We got his wedding band back. We got his business card with his name on it..
