The Truth Behind 9/11

[Nitro]

I think there must of been explosives on the plane or inside the building, Otherwise the WTC would have had a slice taken out or a hole in the side and not just ripped apart.

 

I think there was a cover up on what actually happened as all anybody knows at this moment is a strong building was ripped apart and brought down to the ground in seconds.

 

Are planes actually made that strong that they can destroy a steel building? Or would they crumple on impact and just leave a hole?

[TheTool]

The fuel is the most explosive thing on a plane, as i said before this must have been some fire to weaken 110 storeys od steel and concrete.

 

Link

 

 

now this link will show you what happens when a steel and concrete building goes on fire.

[Slim]

The fuel is the most explosive thing on a plane, as i said before this must have been some fire to weaken 110 storeys od steel and concrete.

Link

now this link will show you what happens when a steel and concrete building goes on fire.

 

Yes, that shows what happens to that concrete and steel building. It doesn't show you what happens to one of the biggest buildings in the world with a unique steel design that has a 757 impacted into the top of it and a stack of aviation fuel burning inside of it.

 

You need to open your eyes, really.

[Slim]

Are planes actually made that strong that they can destroy a steel building? Or would they crumple on impact and just leave a hole?

 

You know how fast a jet airline goes? You know the force in which something travelling that speed impacts on a stationary object? You know the heat produced by a full tank of aviation fuel burning?

 

Much of the outside of the wtc was glass, you expect a 757 to bounce off?

[WilDDog]

The fuel is the most explosive thing on a plane, as i said before this must have been some fire to weaken 110 storeys od steel and concrete.

 

 

When a plane fully laden with fuel hits a building, the effect is a bomb and to make it real simple it explodes with such a velocity, nothing is left of it. It evaporates in the explosion as does everything around it.

The WTC probably collapsed because of the weight of the concrete floors collapsing, once one went, the load on the next one would of been so great it would of caused a domino effect on the remaining floors. Which would of caused the building to collapse from the inside.

The design of the load on the floors of the building would of been designed for furniture load not the the load of the other floors falling from height and being stacked on top of each other. That would of caused the damage..

 

Explosives in the building, what a croc of shit.

 

Steel on the other hand isn't fire proof. It's manufactured components are heated to form. There would of also been either bolts holding it together, which when heated to that extent would of basically popped off and melted or steel members would have been welded, again with a fire that hot welds would have melted. Hence one collapsed building.

[Amadeus]

Some of these sites are absolutely vast - amazing how much time and money people must have invested into "researching" these events...

 

I nevertheless doubt that any nation could pull off a stunt like that, especially not America. It would require thousands of "insiders", helpers, and supporters, vast amounts of data and an incredibly meticulous preparation to do that. The Yanks can't even prevent Janet Jackson's tit from falling out during SuperBowl halftime...

 

I have to admit I've been reading through that 9-11research site for a bit, though, and I can see where the fascination comes from. That whole "controlled demolition" theory baffles me a bit, though..

 

As far as I understand it, "controlled demolition" is something like an art, requiring a lot of preparation, which usually involves holes being drilled into strategic places in the building, and in the case of steel-framed buildings, even blast blankets (usually attached to the outside of the building) to prevent debris from flying around like bullets.

 

Most importantly, though, it involves explosives.

 

So apart from the fact that a whole team of specialists would have been required to rig the buildings in advance (drill holes, lay miles of wires, plant explosives, etc..), and totally disregrading that it's pretty impossible to fly two jets into the building with such precision, that the alleged secondary explosions wouldn't look out of place, how exactly do these people think that the explosives "already inside" the building would survive the impact and not go off when a million liters of jet fuel ignite next to them ?

[ans]

And how do they think they managed to lay all these explosives over a period of time where the buildings were in use?

 

'Hey buddy, what you working on?'

'Oh you know, laying some explosives in this floor'

'Well shit.....'

[Chinahand]

The fuel is the most explosive thing on a plane, as i said before this must have been some fire to weaken 110 storeys od steel and concrete.

 

Link

 

 

now this link will show you what happens when a steel and concrete building goes on fire.

 

 

I do love the silly season.

 

The Madrid fire was an extensive fire, in a 32 story building.

 

It started in the top and worked its way down, creating a towering inferno. The reports say the fire reached 800 degrees C.

 

The only combustable items were the building structure and furniture.

 

The WTC fires were intensive fires concentrated within a few floors of 110 storey buildings. Engineering analysis of failed structural steelwork shows the temperatures were in the order of 1000 degrees C.

 

The WTC fires had 90,000 gallons of Jet fuel explode into a fire ball that was hot enough to ignite alluminium, as well as the building structure and furniture.

 

There is a big difference between heat and temperature: a spark has a huge temperature, but almost no heat; a 1000 degree sparkler won't burn through my trousers!

 

In the WTO fires there was huge amounts of temperature and heat concentrated into just a few floors. In the Madrid fire the extensive nature of the fire meant there was much less heat concentrated in to the structure.

 

In the WTO fires once the floors where the fires were burning, collapsed there was no way to stop a runaway process; the weight above them was so great, plus accelerated by gravity to create a huge impulse to punch through the lower floors; a classic house of cards collapse.

 

The Madrid fire was a huge fire that structurally damaged a minor skyscraper; there is every indication that it could have collapsed and was so structurally weakened by the fire it had to be demolished afterwards.

 

I in no way see this as showing anything unusual about the WTC collapses; quite the opposite it confirms that fires, even extensive, non-fuelled fires, pose a great risk.

 

Just some questions for the conspiracy nutters: why was it necessary to blow up WTC 7? Why was it necessary to set fire to it and let it burn for 7 hours before blowing it up? How were the explosives and fuses kept from detonating during these 7 hours?

 

How was it possible to get the pilots to fly their planes into the correct floors where the explosives had been rigged in the two different buildings?

 

Many huge american coporations lost billions of dollars in the WTC collapses; Warren Buffets Berkshire Hathaway being the most famous example. These companies aren't involved in Iraq or the military or oil, but have trully huge resources to be directed to preserve their interests.

 

They had a huge vested interest in ensuring the insurance claims the attacks caused were not paid out. For example there were major legal battles fought over whether the WTO attacks were one or two incidents; ie whether the companies involved could claim once or twice.

 

These companies employed structural engineers, lawyers, and investigators by the thousand to attempt to prove the buildings were badly designed, or badly built, or whatever reason they could think of to stop having to pay out the insurance claim, but they could not find any thing other than a perfectly rational explanation of the events.

 

Meanwhile Conspiracy Tim the computer geek with 20 dollars and his evenings free has found conclusive proof the whole thing was a deliberate fraud designed to make a killing on the stock exchange when the markets crashed and to allow another set of huge corporations to make money hand over fist as they lead America into its biggest foreign policy disaster since Vietnam.

 

Your just silly for believing this sort of thing. Silly silly silly.

 

Happy New Year!

[Gladys]

There have been a number of documentaries explaining how the WTC towers collapsed. The floors were suspended from the central core to the outer framework, tied by bolted joints. The metalwork was covered with fire-proofing foam.

 

When the planes hit , the first effect was to blow the fireproofing foam off some of the metalwork. This then left the metal exposed to the intense heat of the burning aviation fuel, causing them to become soft and weak, eventually parting from the joints which secured them to the outer structure. One floor would fall on another weakened floor and so on, creating a pancaking effect inside the outer structure. This is why they both fell so neatly.

 

The docs explained that at the time they were designed, aircraft were smaller and the consequences of one hitting factored into the design. But, of course, they couldn't factor in larger aircraft, nor could they factor in a deliberate attack; did anyone really think that aircraft would be deliberately flown into the towers even on 8/9/2001?

 

The official line on how the towers collapsed stacks up to me (admittedly, no structural engineer). Far more interesting and chilling is how the US has since responded to these attacks. Now, there probably are a number of conspiracies worth watching!

[bollocks]

Well it's obvious this debate/shoot down is going nowhere, so I'm out. I'll leave you with 150 mainstream smoking guns regarding our 'conspiracy theories'. Don't be an asshole, and please read before adding anymore ignorance to this thread.

 

http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

 

John Pilger is worth looking into as well. He's a very honest journalist with balls as big as a house. I suggest his book, New Rulers Of The World. (Praised by Noam Chomsky, another intellect worth exploring)

 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/185984393...glance&n=283155

 

Globalisation is a very real thing, and Imperialist pricks will do just about anything to gain supreme power. Once you realise this, everything discussed in this thread will become alot easier to understand.

[ans]

I love the way the essence of the conspiracy nuts defence is that the rest of us are too stupid to understand their 'enlightened' nonsense.

 

It's a shame it's never crossed their mind that it might just be the other way round....

[bollocks]

I love the way the essence of the conspiracy nuts defence is that the rest of us are too stupid to understand their 'enlightened' nonsense.

 

It's a shame it's never crossed their mind that it might just be the other way round....

 

Haha, you tit. The fact is, I was just as sceptical as you once upon a time. My opinion hasn't just turned over night. Flipping hec, I don't think you'll ever understand how frustrating this is. Did you even read through any of the 150 smoking guns that I posted? They're all mainstream news articles by the way.

[the mo beats experience]

Fantastic, the Yanks did it to themselves, thats great news.

It certainly eases my mind now i know there's not a Muslim nation bent on taking over the world in a 100 year take-over plan. Starting off in shops, hospitals and schools, influencing our lives, teaching our children, treating our sick, stopping us celebrating xmas, inventing bird-flu, mad-cow disease and other fatal illnesses, blowing up buses and trains, crashing plains, destroying our way of life and getting into parliament

 

I love "conspiracy theories", i especially love the fact they're exactly that, a theory, in other words a load of absolute cack-a-lack. Damn all you that've made me trawl through a load of bullshit sites for the last hour and a half, the yanks are coming for YOU next.

[bollocks]

Fantastic, the Yanks did it to themselves, thats great news.

It certainly eases my mind now i know there's not a Muslim nation bent on taking over the world in a 100 year take-over plan. Starting off in shops, hospitals and schools, influencing our lives, teaching our children, treating our sick, stopping us celebrating xmas, inventing bird-flu, mad-cow disease and other fatal illnesses, blowing up buses and trains, crashing plains, destroying our way of life and getting into parliament *

 

I love "conspiracy theories", i especially love the fact they're exactly that, a theory, in other words a load of absolute cack-a-lack. Damn all you that've made me trawl through a load of bullshit sites for the last hour and a half, the yanks are coming for YOU next.**

 

*Conspiracy theories aside, this still doesn't justify the resulting 684,000 casualities (I also believe this number is hugely dumbed-down) from the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts.

 

**I'm sorry, but your claim is the only thing here that's bullshit. If you happened to 'trawl' through these 'bullshit' sites, then surely you can answer the following questions (random as they are, they're the bits of evidence that stick out in my opinion).

 

01. April '01, NORAD requested a war games event of having a terrorist group hijack a commercial airline and fly it into the Pentagon. Why had this exercise never been conducted before? Was it just coincidental, throughout the decades of commercial flight, that this exercise be held the same year a 9/11?

 

02. September '01, Gas station and hotel's security cameras recorded Pentagon crash, but FBI arrived within minutes and confiscated films. Why exactly? Surely they could fuck over all our 'theories', just by releasing these films? Or even, allowing an independant committee to view them?

 

03. Rumsfeld announces Pentagon lost track of $2.3 trillion the day before it gets hit (CBS, DoD) attacks came near end of fiscal year & important budget information was located in the damaged area (Arlington County) large number of fatalities at Pentagon were civilian accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts (Pitt Post-Gazette). Do you believe that i'm crazy for calling this evidence and that this was all coincidence?

[the mo beats experience]

Conspiracy theories aside, this still doesn't justify the resulting 684,000 casualities (I also believe this number is hugely dumbed-down) from the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts.

No, it doesn't, absolutely not. I wish everyone could be friends, and live in a perfect world. I should imagine that if the middle east weren't in such a mess and we all got on, that it'd be a great place to visit.

 

But i feel, that Iraq needed to be liberated, and once its all cooled down(if allowed to be), and its democracy is left to work, that everyone will see that. It is,of course, an unacceptable loss of life, no buts, except-but thats a different issue mate.