It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Entire Building on Fire Does Not Collapse-Beijing

page: 18
59
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 06:34 AM
link   
reply to post by EvilAxis
 



Posted by JFJ123

So are you saying the building was rigged before 9/11?


I find it funny that this was the conclusion that you came to...

Granted that was probably what EvilAxis implied, but none of these quotes are his...I think


[edit on 12-2-2009 by daddymax]


Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 2/12/2009 by Hal9000]




posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by adam_zapple

Originally posted by talisman
let us do away with demolition crews, they would not be needed, all we have to do is bang a building at random than start some fires and leave it. Than we can watch the building collapapse into its own footprint.


What's your definition of "footprint"?

CDs are more precise so as to not severely damage buildings across the street (as wtc7 did).


CD's don't usually happen to "significantly damaged" buildings...isn't that one of your anti-truther tenets. Possibly the position, and percentage f the damage that was done altered the controllable execution a bit, hhhmmmm?



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Griff
 


I will accede to "designed that way" and will even assume "constructed that way." If the trusses and concrete are expanding against the exterior columns and inner core columns, would that not stress the 5/8 bolts at the joints? Would you claim that they would not break under such stress? If you were to calculate the difference in length due to expansion of a 400 to 500 C temperature rise, how much longer would they get? What would happen after they failed?


Simple answer: Since the going theory is that these bolts were strong enough to pull the exterior columns inward, then these bolts didn't fail. Obviously, this is the towers.

Also, without you defining the length of the member we are talking about, I can't calculate the difference in length due to a 100 degree difference.

BTW, the difference in length is the same whether it went from 0C to 100C or from 400C to 500C. The difference in temperature of both is still 100 degrees C.

The proper way to find the difference in length is to take the difference between room temperature and the temperature the steel got to. But, since no testing was done by NIST to discover the actual temperature achieved in the WTC 7 steel, I really don''t know how they found the amount of thermal expansion other than to guess.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by talisman
 


how so? The entire side of the structure was aflame.

The fallacy that most believe is that it was a small 2 floor office fire.

uh, no. it was an all-inclusive fire. The fact that a side of the structure was gone also helped.


Why are people still spouting this nonsense?
The "all-inclusive fire" in WTC7 was thoroughly debunked in this misleadingly titled thread: WTC-7 North Side MASSIVE Fires .... CBS News

NIST have categorically stated that whatever damage was sustained by WTC7 did not cause the implosion. Once again:


this structural damage did not initiate the collapse... None of the large pieces of debris from WTC 2 (the south tower) hit WTC 7 because of the large distance between the two buildings.
Would WTC 7 have collapsed even if there had been no structural damage induced by the collapse of the WTC towers?
Yes. Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed...


NIST Fact Sheet



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
I wonder if they're going to let the burnt out hulk of the building sit there for 6 months and be a safety hazard so they can do a "proper" investigation like the "truthers" would want? Instead of cleaning up the dangerous area as soon as possible, hauling away and properly disposing of the debris.


Yeah, cause that's exactly what we are asking for.


First, we were told it was a terrorist attack and not a simple accidental fire. Let's not forget that when we go making sarcastic posts about investigations.

Now, if the authorities said that this building in Bejing was an arson fire, then yes, I would feel an investigation is in order. You don't?

BTW, the bolded part makes me laugh. I can pretty much guarantee that the steel will be kept for at least a small amount of time for an investigation. Unlike the WTC 7 that couldn't leave our country fast enough before any professionals got to examine it. BTW, those aren't my words.


"Thousands of tons of steel were carted away from ground zero and recycled before any expert could examine what could have been tell-tale clues. Support trusses, fireproofing fragments and even burnt out electrical switches that might have given scientists and engineers insight were lost forever - even before an investigation was underway.


Straight from the horses mouth.

www.house.gov...

But, we're the crazy ones right?


Also, I wonder if they're going to do a proper investigation such as making sure a plane didn't hit the building and start the fire, or check the molecular cohesion of the steel to make sure high energy beam weapons didn't disassociate the steel supports molecules? Or check to see if arab workers went into the building earlier and planted thermite charges? Because we all know if they don't check all those things, then they didn't do a proper investigation and/or they are covering up what really happened.


Again, I'll state that this was not reported as arson. Therefore a more thourough investigation (like finding the causes of things) isn't neccessary.

Also, the building didn't collapse. So, your sarcastic remarks about planes, molecular beams, arabs and thermite are so out there in left feld it isn't even worth commenting on really.


Just some thoughts about how similar these situations should be based on previous complaints from some "truthers" .


If this building was considered an arson attack or a terrorist attack, then yes, I would demand an investigation before most of the steel is carted away and recycled.

Your argument makes no sense what-so-ever.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 

You're right of course.Who knows what mixtures are in fireworks to cause all those different effects and colors?I bet they're trade secrets.I was proffering a possibility.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by talisman

Originally posted by adam_zapple

Originally posted by talisman
let us do away with demolition crews, they would not be needed, all we have to do is bang a building at random than start some fires and leave it. Than we can watch the building collapapse into its own footprint.


What's your definition of "footprint"?

CDs are more precise so as to not severely damage buildings across the street (as wtc7 did).


This actually proves the point, in that some Controlled Demo's have gone wrong and damaged other buildings. But the general direction of straight down suffices for footprint.


So "footprint" = "general direction of straight down"?
That would include EVERY building that's ever collapsed.

No...footprint is the footprint. None of the WTC buildings collapsed within their footprint, no matter how many times you claim it.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by adam_zapple
There isn't a single quote on that page from any firefighter who believes that any of those 3 buildings were brought down by controlled demolition.

You're a professional liar:


Just after the disaster, Firefighter Louie Cacchioli said, "We think there were bombs set in the building."


He said he thought there were bombs in the building...he didn't say he thought the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. I'm not the liar here.


Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by adam_zapple
Hundreds of firefighters were killed that day, and you think that other firefighters are knowingly participating in the cover-up of the murder of their brothers & friends because they're afraid to lose their jobs?

Damned straight -- firefighters are afraid of losing their jobs.


Wow....if someone had killed hundreds of my friends, family and coworkers, I certainly wouldn't cover up their murder just to keep my job...that's ridiculous.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Just an FYI

Coefficient of Thermal Expansion
10-6/°C 10-6/°F
Concrete 7.4-13 4.1-7.3
Steel 11-12 6.1-6.7

because PCC materials vary considerably. Realistic data for the types of materials being used in concrete mixtures are rarely available and, if they are available, they are likely to be based on a specific PCC mix design or aggregate type. However, an agency could test typical mixes containing a range of aggregate types to obtain typical values for their materials.

Might give you a basic idea for what you're discussing.



Thanks for the info, but I inspected concrete batch plants for QA and QC. I also tested the concrete being placed on-site for QA & QC.

But, what I'm getting at is this:

This is for reinforced concrete but is sufficient to explain a composite deck also.


Three physical characteristics give reinforced concrete its special properties. First, the coefficient of thermal expansion of concrete is similar to that of steel, eliminating internal stresses due to differences in thermal expansion or contraction. Second, when the cement paste within the concrete hardens this conforms to the surface details of the steel, permitting any stress to be transmitted efficiently between the different materials. Usually steel bars are roughened or corrugated to further improve the bond or cohesion between the concrete and steel. Third, the alkaline chemical environment provided by calcium carbonate (lime) causes a passivating film to form on the surface of the steel, making it much more resistant to corrosion than it would be in neutral or acidic conditions.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
Hey "Talisman", are you questioning the WTC Towers Collapse, or only Building 7?

Because as far as the Twin Towers go (Buildings 1 and 2), they were inundated with Jet Fuel (JP-8), which does not burn like a regular fire.


Jet Fuel (Kerosene) burns like a regular fire. It is not like Gasoline that explodes -- it also needs something to burn on. So the dripping down and burning lower levels theory. As an early teen, I used to keep my cabin warm with Kerosene during cold winter nights. Guess what? It burned in a steel container that never got weaker.


As for Building 7, well, that depends on a lot. For one, the Seismic Tremors unleashed by the Twin Towers collapsing would have weakened any building nearby that just so happened to resonate at the same frequency as the tremors (depends upon Building Materials, Foundation type, Ground Structure, etc.). Also, there is a maze of Underground connections between the WTC Towers, and Building 7, which includes an Underground Shopping Mall, Subway Tunnels, and Walkways.

Also, do not forget the Underground Parking Garages, which could have easily become a repository for smoldering Jet Fuel, as well as Vehicles full of Gasoline and Diesel.



I never thought of that. Basically, because the foundation of the WTC is a huge mountain of reinforced concrete and steel. I looked at seismic charts of the event -- and it was just a tiny blip. Mostly what fell was dust -- the building was pulverized in mid-air. There wasn't any giant impact as far as the Seismologists records are concerned.

The idea of blast force and jet fuel passing around parking garages and undermining another building -- wow. If this doesn't happen when large buildings get demolished, then it doesn't happen when a fire rages on the 80th floor. Buildings directly around North and South Tower were not too damaged. Building 6 stand between them and Building 7.

If the Jet Fuel is dripping into the basement -- then its not up at the top causing the floor to collapse.

Only if you had a large explosive at the base, is there ANY chance of some energy being transmitted to Building 7 -- and even then, it would be destroying pavement and everything nearby --- it wouldn't skip a building, and end up creating a shock wave under a building further away. That might, however, happen with cartoon physics.

Here's more:
Jet fuel burns IN AN ENGINE, at about 1,000 degrees Celsius; WikiAnswers

But really, sitting on the ground in an office fire, you aren't forcing air under pressure -- look at the burning temperture of Kerosene (which is jet fuel);
wiki.answers.com...

575 degrees in open air.

An office fire, with Kerosene, might get to 825 °C

>> It's amazing though, how wrong most of the websites are out there -- there seems to be a concerted effort to give people the idea that it melts like ice cream.

Do a test, turn on your oven at the highest temperature -- leave it on for two hours -- that's longer and almost as hot as the WTC fires. Turn off your oven. Stand back, it might collapse.

A thin piece of steel, routinely, protects your oven, a grill, a firepit with natural gas burning with a blue flame - right on the metal. Why is steel being used if it is such a weak substance under heat and load? The answer is: in order for you to believe the nonsense of the WTC collapse, the Powers That Be have hypnotized you. You think your thoughts are your own -- but really, for most people, everything you know is wrong.

Seriously, you were told to think that it could happen and you believed it. A few experts come on TV and make it sound plausible.

Here, this seems to jibe with reality, allegedly from a soldier with a background in blowing things up; LINK

Fires that kindled from the fuel in the planes were too shortlasting and weak to be able to severely damage the structure of the skyscrapers. Even in the extreme situation, the heat from a kerosene fire cannot threat the durability of a steel trunk. With the temperature of carbohydrate fires that reaches only 825 °C (approx. 1517 °F) steel weakens at 800 °C (approx. 1470 °F) and melts at 1585 °C (approx. 2890 °F). In the skyscrapers of the WTC the surroundings were not at all ideal as there were far too many steel columns and they led heat away from the burning area. WTC 1 burned for 102 minutes and WTC 2 for 56 minutes only. A fire burning much longer, from 10 to 20 hours, could slowly increase the burning temperature down to perhaps 1100 °C (approx. 2010 °F). Provided there is more substance to burn, such a fire will damage concrete and irons, but not severely heavy steel constructions.


If it were hot enough, it would have blown out the windows or melted them BEFORE it fell. There were people looking out 10' from the hole.

>> This author is speculating that a small-yield nuke was used. It would account for the steel sitting in molten pools weeks later because they would have absorbed ionizing radiation. I've been thinking Thermate -- but how does that reaction stay hot? Personally, I'd stay away from HOW everything was done, because we don't have all the facts. We know enough to say; impossible for a fire to bring it down AT FREEFALL SPEEDS. In some freak accident of compounded errors, yes, I think that building might pancake collapse -- but it couldn't happen without transferring energy to the floor below, and it couldn't happen AND pull down the building's core.

>> But regardless of theory -- I'm looking at this building going down. There definitely is a huge pyroclastic cloud above it. There is nothing going on in an office fire with jet fuel that is going to explode like that -- remember, the fuel was burning for an hour -- remember? Is it a waste-paper basket or a barbecue grill? Come on and think. The structure MIGHT have been undermined, such that one floor slams into another -- at that point, the fire has absolutely no influence on floors above or below.

It's just a floor or two of a steel building on fire. Nothing in the normal world that is going to make that huge puff of atomized concrete, nothing in a floor collapse that can make the floor below disintegrate BEFORE it touches it -- the rate of fall is a clue folks to what is IMPOSSIBLE with a collapsing structure.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Go look at the video -- on the north tower, a 20 story junk of the top is toppling over and in mid-air, it turns to dust. I'm still wondering what type of air can do that. I don't even know what kind of explosive charge can do that.

It is plausible to have a backdraft in a room, suddenly ignite all the super heated dust in the air. But hey -- it's an open floor plan and we already mentioned the big AIRPLANE SIZED hole that people were looking out. We are talking a MEGA backdraft fuel-air bomb freak accident and all this in an open floor plan about an acre in size? Another really farfetched idea.

But dang it -- what is causing the explosive pyroclastic cloud above the building? The explosions and dust at the base, well before the towers fell? How can it fall so quickly? Why is there molten steel? Absolutely nothing fits with a regular fire, and you can forget the airplane -- there just isn't anything in there to go BOOMB an hour later -- it's burnt up in the first 15 minutes (tops). The core comes down with the floors -- which means that the bolts did not weaken and break -- because they'd have to be strong enough to pull down the core.

The middle slumping first means the core is gone -- at least at the top. So, the top twenty floors might have just slumped down -- at the most extreme coincidence.

>> What is more plausible, is that charges were set in Building 7, because it had a lot of gold bullion, and court cases against the Bush family ($17 Billion in Federal Note fraud), and it also had the ENRON case. The airplane that got shot out of the sky after people on board took back control, was meant for building 7 -- at a guess. How would I know unless they invited me to the planning session?

If that Flight 93 (if I remember -- it's crap that I have to waste space in my brain with this nonsense) had made it to the towers, it would have been easier to make the fantasy work.

But there is no fantasy coincidence that can make a sympathetic fire occur two blocks away in one corner of a building, and then that steel building comes plummeting down.

They had to blow the charges, or have a lot more to cover up.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


This is frustrating in the extreme.

We now have MAGIC concrete, that is somehow different from reinforced concrete anywhere else -- when does it end?

The steel structure at WTC was OF COURSE, different from the Parent Post's reference to the Chinese building on fire. Almost all buildings are going to be a bit unique.

But it's the magic bullet from JFK that stops, turns, and changes directions -- the 14' engines, that supposedly destroyed the core, must have made multiple passes. We are supposed to imagine it's like a bone in a human, and this bullet is bouncing around, such that all 17 tubes are destroyed (a guess, I haven't looked at the plans in a while) -- anyway, too many for two engines to destroy -- even if you ignore all the crash tests anyone has ever seen with a plane and a concrete wall -- the wall always wins. And a support holding up thousands and thousands of metric tons is going to be so many time more massive and strong than an airplane engine, I think you'd have better luck bringing down a bull elephant with a BB Gun. Seriously.

I've heard backdrafts, and dripping fuel and now we have the UNIQUE self-detonating concrete or something. Really, I can't keep track of all the nonsense people use to justify the WTC coincidence theory.

In China, the entire steel building is engulfed in flames for hours. It doesn't collapse. There are no pools of molten steel, no pyroclastic clouds -- it is like all the other steel buildings that ever caught on fire, except for the three at the WTC.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by trueforger
 


Isn't thermate an oxygen or sulfur boosted thermite? That would require the inclusion of a metal oxide reducible by Aluminum. Thermite uses black iron oxide.


Sounds about right. Thermate is just a more powerful, commercial version of the Aluminum and Iron Oxide in Thermate.

Tests done on some steel taken from an artist who was to build a memorial sculpture, showed presence of Thermate, sulfer and aluminum I believe. But since it wasn't through "official channels" it cannot be used as evidence.

The official channels, like Controlled Demolitions who was given the job of inspecting the sight, and the NIST, are too busy covering up to be much use.

The NIST at first said that building 7 did not fall at free fall speed, and recently, they said they were incorrect, that it did fall at free fall speed.

>> And I'm sick to death about all these theories about how weak the WTC was. Both the curtain wall and the multi-tube structure at the core, are very strong, and were designed with impacts and motion in mind. A pancake collapse COULD conceivably happen -- but not while pulling down the core. Remember -- that core holds the whole building up. Whether the floors are standing, or falling, doesn't add enough force to destroy the core.

It was impossible to have this collapse with the core, at free fall speeds, without some sort of demolition charges set up. I'm sorry, I can't change reality.

The supports never failed --- because they were strong enough to pull down the outer wall and the core -- or if they did fail, then the core is standing. This is a massive case of Cognitive Dissonance to have one's cake and eat it too.

The explosions at the end were not possible either -- even with magic kerosene and implosions, because the magic kerosene had to be hotter than any other kerosene and weaken steel, simultaneously, it flows down to the bottom, and somehow finds something to ignite it.

>> Lusitania, Gulf of Tonkin, WMDs, We do not torture. Nope, things like this never happen, especially with people of integrity like the Bush administration, who cannot tolerate greed and corruption.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Kratos1220

Wait, are you implying they set up thermate charges after it collapsed? You can't be serious.

Based on that photo, I have no idea when they were cut. They could have been cut as part of final demo long after 9/11.



We can only go on the ethics of the people involved in the investigation.

You know, like the people who gave the all clear on air quality, while they added air filters to their offices, and now many of the first responders are dead with lung diseases.

We don't know if they were cut before or after -- because the FBI were not allowed to investigate.

If they had allowed an above-board investigation, and allowed more than one group to test steel beams and treat it like a crime scene -- then there would not now, be so many conspiracy theories.

But the Bush Crime Family, seems to be surrounded with coincidence, and THEY always cover up everything and demand that they be given the benefit of the doubt. How would examining the steel structure help al Qaeda? They already saw a total freak accident building down three buildings with two planes. I'm sure they are convinced that Allah is on their side -- he must be, for some office fires to bring down these huge structures.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Kratos1220

Wait, are you implying they set up thermate charges after it collapsed? You can't be serious.

Based on that photo, I have no idea when they were cut. They could have been cut as part of final demo long after 9/11.



We can only go on the ethics of the people involved in the investigation.

You know, like the people who gave the all clear on air quality, while they added air filters to their offices, and now many of the first responders are dead with lung diseases.

We don't know if they were cut before or after -- because the FBI were not allowed to investigate.


I've already posted a photo showing them being cut...AFTER the collapse.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by dragonseeker

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by EvilAxis

Originally posted by jfj123
I'm not gullable enough to believe the bush administration was able to pull off the most diabolical, largest conspiracy in our history yet they're stupid enough to to out of office with an approval rating in the 20's. They can't be smart and stupid at the same time.


...

Now is this just another guess/accusation ? or do you actually have any evidence to suggest anything you just said was true?

Let's say what you're saying is true:
So the following people would have been involved:

OK. Let's take this one at a time, to address what might seem far-fetched.

Personnel at the FAA
>> Explain the head of security at the FAA destroying the RADAR tapes of the incident. We aren't talking ALL the personnel, just the guy in charge.
Personnel at NORAD
>> Not all personal, just the head cheese, put in place by Bush. NORAD was busy with 5 simultaneous exercises at the time -- I'm sure against their better judgement. If you listen to the audio tapes, they are constantly saying; "Is this real -- not a drill?"
Personnel at Other key posts
>> Other than the Security Guards that were hired from a company set up by Neal Bush that year you mean?
The entire NIST investigative group
>> Why the entire group? Just the guy appointed by Bush hiring a bunch of know-nothings who couldn't get such a sweet job, the usual crook surrounded by idiots scheme. The NIST has repeatedly gone back on earlier statements and made assertions that were not based on testing -- since the steel was not examined before being sent to China.
Port authority
>> The Port Authority building was destroyed in Building 7. Why are they supposed to be in on this.
The FBI investigators
>> The FBI was not in on the investigation. They were ordered by the Bush administration to NOT follow financial records with the credit cards linked to al Qaeda. They were orderd to stand down and let the Bin Laden Family fly away. An agent at the FBI, sent in 72 notices that the guy he was watching was planning to attack with planes. Another agent -- name escapes me, came up with a briefcase and most of the evidence connecting the incident to al Qaeda, and the names of the 19 hijackers -- 7 of which appear to be alive and well and claim no connection to the incident.
The CIA investigators
>> Not aware of any. 4 of the hijackers, however, did get their passports at a CIA base in Saudi Arabia while they were on a CIA watchlist.
Israeli special services personnel
>> Not necessarily involved. There was an incident of the "dancing arabs" who were caught with video cameras filming the incident and then let go, described as either Mossad or art students. My guess is, that they were there to get evidence, and the Bush family SUDDENLY was pro-Israel -- if you go back and look at old tapes and anything Bush ever said, that was never the case before 9/12/2001 as far as I know.
If you believe the buildings were rigged for demo then all the personnel required to rig all three buildings.
>> OK. Fine. I'm guessing the Controlled Demolitions group that was hired to investigate the wreckage INSTEAD of the FBI, might be a good place to start. In BushCo, you investigate your own crimes.
support personnel
>> Like the bagman with the cash? Check.
cheney
>> In a bunker directing the mock training exercises that was confusing the hell out of NORAD? Check.
silverstein
>> He made about $6 Billion on the insurance. Got the lease of the building for about $147 Million from Ports Authority, doubled the insurance in July on attacks by terrorism, and then saved a cool Billion or more for what would he would have spent on removing Asbestos. Tried to claim this as two separate incidents to get even more money. Silverstein seems to have done quite well with this tragedy.
financial support personnel
>> You mean like Ollie North who ran drugs to pay for weapons that Pappy Bush gave to the Iranians to hold onto the hostages? A guy like that? Did you know, that the SS Poet, the boat that delivered those weapons, sank with all hands on deck?
Special ops personnel
>>
Personnel at the pentagon
>> Right, like Rumsfeld's special projects team? What happened to all the video tapes and the anti-aircraft people on the roof? Yeah, sure, someone in charge at the Pentagon -- like fricken' Rumsfeld? Yeah, I'll go with that.
etc..
OK notice how long the list is starting to get? I could go on and on with a list of required personnel.
>> I count, one security guy at FAA, the chief at NORAD appointed by Bush, Security Guards/Demolitions experts who set charges at night -- maybe 12, one or two cronies at the NIST and then a bunch of useless idiots like populate Homeland Security, maybe one or two Handlers at the FBI (like the guy who handled the Miami 7 and gave them the idea to go after the Sears Tower), Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Silverstein. That's 21 People. I'd round it out with 24 because someone has to make phone calls and get donuts. Someone has to drive the truck that takes the gold out of building 7 that helps with Hush money.

Most of the people involved were probably confused, or inept, and are scared to death and didn't realize their part in any of it.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Those who would relinquish liberty to gain security, deserve neither and will soon lose both.

Thanks for your tireless work to help facilitate the loss of liberty.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by adam_zapple

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Kratos1220

Wait, are you implying they set up thermate charges after it collapsed? You can't be serious.

Based on that photo, I have no idea when they were cut. They could have been cut as part of final demo long after 9/11.



We can only go on the ethics of the people involved in the investigation.

You know, like the people who gave the all clear on air quality, while they added air filters to their offices, and now many of the first responders are dead with lung diseases.

We don't know if they were cut before or after -- because the FBI were not allowed to investigate.


I've already posted a photo showing them being cut...AFTER the collapse.


I saw a photo of the building IMMEDIATELY after the collapse. Jagged steel that looked cut. Nothing in a collapse "CUTS" steel. However, since there was no proper investigation, we don't know.

If you have people who were involved with the conspiracy, however, they can easily RECUT any steel beam the want, and pose in the process. There is a big difference between just having photos of things, and a crime scene.

There was no crime scene investigation and there were no independent investigations of the steel. The NIST's assumptions, are based upon concluding that the building pancake collapsed, and then working backwards to find thermal expansion estimates and such that support it. They don't have any REAL data to go by. And they've been caught falsifying their data on more than one occasion.

>> Again, Saddam had WMDs and there was no torture at Abu Ghraib. -- it took a LOT more conspiracy and disinformation to get us into the Iraq war -- so it could not possibly have happened. Nobody is in Iraq fighting for the US right now. Silly Iraq War conspiracy theorists.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Fundamentally, there is a disconnect problem here.

You and I and everyone we know, lives in a world were what we do counts, and if we do something wrong, we can get caught and punished.

However, we have never been a part of the world of the movers and shakers. There are FACTIONS in all the government agencies. Bureaucrats who do their jobs and love America. There are also psychopaths around, who wield power, and answer to the Wealthy.

The FBI under Hoover, spied on Americans-- it was a very large conspiracy and it controlled a lot of people with extortion. When Nixon's administration was investigated, during I think the Warren Commission, it was found that they had a list of 20,000 people who would get rounded up if there was any civil unrest -- an enemies list.

Donald Rumsfeld, while working for Nixon, wanted to nuke North Vietnam and probably still thinks that would have helped us win the war (and what about the one after that when China retaliates bright boy?).

That's just one. If I went through the history of all the PNAC members, and the former Nixon hatchet men that were in Bush's cabal -- it would take all day and it would sound pretty crazy. You know, people like Negroponte who helped dissappear and torture people in Chile, then brought his expertise to Iraq -- and then was strangely, was involved in getting financial firms on Wall Street to over-leverage their investments. There are at least 8 people wanted in his administration for War Crimes -- and that was before 2007. They had to negotiate with Canada, Chile, Central America, Columbia, Germany and others to even visit those states without someone being hauled into court.

I mean really, you've got two dozen people with a rap sheet. They've been accused of rigging two elections. They got CAUGHT falsifying evidence for war. Everything around them is turning to crap, and seems like people are embezzling, committing crimes or handing out billions of dollars without receipts.

>> But to get back to the original point: If Hoover's FBI and then the NSA, were involved in totally illegal domestic spying -- real conspiracies. There stands to reason that there are all kinds of people, still in these operations, that do whatever is required for the right price. There are millionaires who leave the CIA. We had the head of the CIA resign, because he was involved with getting hookers and politicians to the Watergate Hotel for poker, and it was paid for by Homeland Securities Limousine bill (in the millions of dollars).

When, or when, do you anti-truthers, get a clue and realize that there are PLENTY of crooks entrenched in all parts of our government, and they can't wait for someone like Bush to line their pockets? I'm sure they all convince themselves, these are necessary acts for the greater good while they keep their mouths shut and count the money.

And I'm sure there are bloggers here, who think they are lying for the greater good, and use the money to buy an XBOX 360. The founding fathers would be proud of you.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by adam_zapple

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Kratos1220

Wait, are you implying they set up thermate charges after it collapsed? You can't be serious.

Based on that photo, I have no idea when they were cut. They could have been cut as part of final demo long after 9/11.



We can only go on the ethics of the people involved in the investigation.

You know, like the people who gave the all clear on air quality, while they added air filters to their offices, and now many of the first responders are dead with lung diseases.

We don't know if they were cut before or after -- because the FBI were not allowed to investigate.


I've already posted a photo showing them being cut...AFTER the collapse.


I saw a photo of the building IMMEDIATELY after the collapse. Jagged steel that looked cut.


Please post the photo in question along with any data that can be used to verify when the photo was taken.



new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join