Re Deleted 911 Thread

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 21 - 40 of total 414 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Big Mike

Trad climber
BC
Nov 29, 2012 - 05:08pm PT
They did test the dust for traces of explosives, and found nothing conclusive.

Who did?? Show evidence. Why are thousands of architects calling for a new investigation??


http://ae911truth.org/

I'm not saying anything is conclusive, but it's worth discussing. Much more important IMHO than any of the political topics you guys discuss all the time. It's pretty close minded to just shut down an argument without even talking about it.....
Big Mike

Trad climber
BC
Nov 29, 2012 - 05:11pm PT
Thermite makes steel burn real good apparently... Makes these neat little micro spheres too which are evident in all the World Trade Center dust samples....
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Nov 29, 2012 - 05:11pm PT
No, they [NIST, FEMA] did not test for explosives.

I just can't cite this enough:

The chair and vice chair of the 9/11 Commission, respectively Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, assert in their book, Without Precedent, that they were "set up to fail" and were starved of funds to do a proper investigation. They also confirm that they were denied access to the truth and misled by senior officials in the Pentagon and the federal aviation authority; and that this obstruction and deception led them to contemplate slapping officials with criminal charges.

Despite the many public statements by 9/11 commissioners and staff members acknowledging they were repeatedly lied to, not a single person has ever been charged, tried, or even reprimanded, for lying to the 9/11 Commission.

My question is why folks are determined to believe the 9/11 Commission Report when the authors themselves claim it was pure bunk.
rectorsquid

climber
Lake Tahoe
Nov 29, 2012 - 05:23pm PT
In addition to the evidence that there was explosives in the building that were pre-planted, there is also a bit of evidence that jet airplanes hit the buildings at high speed and their fuel ignited.

I am more inclined to think that people involved made mistakes and were greedy or stupid than I am to think that they were amazingly clever. So clever that they pulled off the most amazing logistical planning since the fake moon landings but were too stupid to know that explosives residue and molten steel would be found?

The nuts are giving way too much credit, and way too little at the same time, to the people who would have planned the whole thing (who are not the terrorists).

But this stuff is pretty funny to read so keep it up.

Dave
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Nov 29, 2012 - 05:39pm PT
This [ http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/11-09-07/ ] is a great link. I'll take the time to go through it.

Now, when are we gonna get Werner to fly that plane into the Pentagon to see what would actually happen in such a case??
Big Mike

Trad climber
BC
Nov 29, 2012 - 05:44pm PT
+1000 Mchale's. I was just going to say, this guy has almost 1800 engineer/architects duped so far! He must be pretty darn convincing!! That article you posted cites the official report lots so its pretty obvious where the bias is on that one... Why didn't they do a real investigation instead of hauling all the evidence away before anyone got the chance??
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
Panorama City, California & living in Seattle
Nov 29, 2012 - 06:05pm PT
Dude, I don't think you are much of a Dr of anything. Want to fess up?
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
Panorama City, California & living in Seattle
Nov 29, 2012 - 06:08pm PT
You mean you just wanna have fun? One does not have to be a demolition expert to understand the forces that would have kept the toppling bldg section intact longer than it was.
Rudder

Trad climber
Costa Mesa, CA
Nov 29, 2012 - 06:33pm PT
Rudder, steel doesn't burn. Not without an agent to make it do so.

That's not what I said.

With your abundant construction knowledge, what made the steel in the WTC buildings "burn?"

Even if melted metal at the WTC didn't have an explanation... assuming the President had the buildings blown up because you've seen videos of melted metal would be as logical as assuming I have abundant construction knowledge. It's just entertaining and extraordinarily whimsical conjecture.

As for the President imploding the buildings as a logical conclusion based on some melted metal videos... have you ever been to or setup a building implosion? There's no melted metal there. Of course, all the utilties are turned off, all the combustibles are removed from the building, and there is no jet fuel.
Karl Baba

Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
Nov 29, 2012 - 06:35pm PT
FWIW there is a large organization of engineers and Architects that dispute the official story on 9-11 based on their scientific analysis

http://ae911truth.org/

over 1700 engineers and Architects (plus bunches of other supporters) are calling for a new investigation of 9-11. Their petition includes their license numbers or degrees



Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Nov 29, 2012 - 06:53pm PT
What impresses the hell out of me is how those devious conspirators were able to figure out exactly where those planes were going to hit the buildings so that they could pre-place the charges in a way so that the charges would resist the fire for the better part of an hour before detonating and collapsing the buildings.

Absolutely brilliant!
Those conspirators must have been evil geniuses (or is that genii ?)!
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Nov 29, 2012 - 06:55pm PT
^^^^^^^^^^ Now THAT was BRILLIANT! HaHaHaHaHaHa!
Big Mike

Trad climber
BC
Nov 29, 2012 - 06:56pm PT
Agreed Dr F.
Rudder

Trad climber
Costa Mesa, CA
Nov 29, 2012 - 06:59pm PT
Is that we need a New 911 Investigation.

More money we don't have to prove more convincingly the same conclusion. Do we really need to do that?
GDavis

Social climber
SOL CAL
Nov 29, 2012 - 07:02pm PT
keeping an eye on this thread.

Chris2

Trad climber
Nov 29, 2012 - 07:06pm PT
An interesting PBS Documentary based only on facts.
http://video.cpt12.org/video/2270078138
sullly

Trad climber
Nov 29, 2012 - 07:23pm PT
photo not found
Missing photo ID#276112
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Nov 29, 2012 - 07:44pm PT
Absolutely shocking that the upper section would tilt towards max damage side. We need a new investigation!

BTW, Chief, Thanks for creating yet another dumbass 911 thread.
Randal Hassen

Gym climber
Sacramento
Nov 29, 2012 - 07:50pm PT
I can see an argument for that. The explosion of material below the fulcrum point in the photo above, does seem quite odd. Even with the amount off mass comming straight down, the projection of material seems rather uniform, and impressive.


Also, it looks like the building should have kept leaning over, rather than comming straight down. Something stopped the momentum of the upper floors from continuing on their path.


Inside job for sure!
monolith

climber
albany,ca
Nov 29, 2012 - 07:51pm PT
That 'explosion' would be supersonic, not the slow speed ejection we see.

And we'd here it thru out manhatten.

Once the backside hinge is broken, there's nothing that would keep it from coming straight down.
Messages 21 - 40 of total 414 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews