TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11?
Pages (162): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 [127] 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 »

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} Dude, let me relate an alternative scenario to what you are saying, so that maybe you will understand your point better: There are two bodies found in a house. Inside, you find blood spattered all over the North wall, at the base of the wall is the body, with several exit wounds to be observed on his/her body, their wallet/purse has been taken. Near the South exit there is the second body, lying on his/her stomach, two bullets in their back. You cannot find any shell casings, or fingerprints. You ask the neighbours if they heard anything, and they respond that they heard several gunshots after two gentleman entered the residence. You rule it as a suicide. edit__ Or natural causes.

No.

WTC 7 was severly damaged by the collapse of the towers.

CLICK

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton No. WTC 7 was severly damaged by the collapse of the towers. CLICK

So then what are the requirements for a complete and total gravity driven collapse? Because 7 was only damaged severely on one side, implying that you can expect with almost 100% certainty that the building, should it collapse, would collapse on the damaged side first; perhaps dragging the relatively intact side down with it.

CERTAINLY NOT AT FREE FALL SPEED HOWEVER.

Read that again.

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} Listen, I stay civil with you twats. The notion that the holes in the Official Story don't beckon a second investigation is laughable, and you 'skeptics' are really nothing more than shallow, teat-of-authority sucking noobs.

As do I. I'm all for a second INDEPENDENT investigation. Until then, until you have a case worthy of a court room, you have nothing. Suck on that ay?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton As do I. I'm all for a second INDEPENDENT investigation. Until then, until you have a case worthy of a court room, you have nothing. Suck on that ay?

I was referring to Mr. Crisp. But cool

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} So then what are the requirements for a complete and total gravity driven collapse? Because 7 was only damaged severely on one side, implying that you can expect with almost 100% certainty that the building, should it collapse, would collapse on the damaged side first; perhaps dragging the relatively intact side down with it. CERTAINLY NOT AT FREE FALL SPEED HOWEVER. Read that again.

With an out of control fire which burned for more than half a day.



I'de be surprised if it didn't fall.

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} I was referring to Mr. Crisp. But cool

Suck on this.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton With an out of control fire which burned for more than half a day. I'de be surprised if it didn't fall.

I see you're still grasping at straws in the effort to perpetuate the coverup.

Fires alone don't even begin to explain the rapid and symmetrical nature of WTC7's collapse, however, let alone the "intergranular melting due to the presence of sulfur" which was found in the only WTC7 steel sample that wasn't rapidly removed and either recycled or shipped away to China and India, or even the molten metal which was found in the basement.

As the late Sherman H. Skolnick wrote in his The Overthrow of the American Republic, Part 14:

quote:

"Why was the evidence, the metal parts of the collapsed towers, not kept to be analyzed? Why was the metal hauled away, with the aid of reputed underworld truckers, and then sold overseas to those nations pledging absolute secrecy of the contents? Certain flag officers contend their treasonous Commander-in-Chief, supervised by Daddy, ordered this to be done".

quote:

WTC 7 - Irrational Arguments B21561 / Thu, 8 Feb 2007 10:02:58 / Intelligence We have a situation (WTC7 collapse) being investigated by NIST. They claim to have ruled out Controlled Demolition and yet they have not studied ANY of the actual steel from the building. From my investigation, it is paramount that steel samples FROM WTC 7 would have to be investigated for evidence of explosives. So, if NIST hasn�t investigated ANY steel from WTC 7�.then how do the Controlled Demolitions Skeptics argue their points? There is no evidence the building came down from diesel fuel, there is no evidence the building came down from damage caused by falling debris, and NIST has not even studied the actual steel from the building. It is irrational to argue against CT when all alternate theories have not one single piece of evidence that supports the assertions. Yes there was damage, but the damage was not documented. We are supposed to believe that the extensive damage to WTC 7 was not photographed in the hours before the collapse? That is almost as outlandish as NIST, the official investigators, not having access to ANY OF THE STEEL FROM WTC 7. The fact is that the building looks like a controlled demolition, there are numerous eyewitness accounts of multiple explosions prior to the collapse, the building fell in mere seconds, the owner claimed they had decided to �pull� the building� Apparently there are images of massive damage to WTC 7 that are TOP SEKRIT and only those in the know and also a widely distributed scientfic (haha) publication called Popular Science could see. Not to mention that the relative of a person closely associated with the Popular Science debunking article works high up in the Bush Admin. after 9/11. Interestingly enough, this same individual had defended some high profile �terrorist types� in the past, ones that may be relative to 9/11. Regardless, we are almost 6 years down the road and NIST has never tested WTC 7 steel. WOW! I have a photoalbum fool of airliner reconstruction images where they reconstruct an airplane after it crashes in order to figure out how it crashed. Ever seen one of those related to 9/11? Ever seen a simulation of the collapses from the �official investigation�? Ever seen a detailed presentation of the structures themsevles? Ever seen anything that would lead you to believe that an actual thorough investigation did in fact take place? ��������������������������������������������� http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3BDraft.pdf pg 5 [on the page counter] Lack of WTC 7 steel precludes tests on the actual material from the structure http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NCSTAR1-3ExecutiveSummary.pdf page 2 E.1 �the steel used in the construction of WTC 7 is described based solely on data from the literature, because no steel from the building was recovered.� page 9 E.6 No steel was recovered from WTC 7 http://www.gnn.tv/blogs/21561/WTC_7...ional_Arguments

From Fire Engineering magazine:

quote:

"Burning Questions...Need Answers": FE's Bill Manning Calls for Comprehensive Investigation of WTC Collapse Fair Lawn, NJ, January 4, 2002-Bill Manning, Fire Engineering's editor in chief, is summoning members of the fire service to "A Call to Action." In his January 2002 Editor's Opinion, "$elling Out the Investigation" (below), he warns that unless there is a full-blown investigation by an independent panel established solely for that purpose, "the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper- and computer-generated hypotheticals." Manning explained: "Clearly, there are burning questions that need answers .... The lessons about the buildings' design and behavior in this extraordinary event must be learned and applied in the real world." In an interview with the New York Daily News today, Manning reiterated his call for a "full-throttle, fully resourced" investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center. He is asking members of the fire service to read "WTC 'Investigation'? A Call to Action" in the January 2002 issue of Fire Engineering and at fireengineering.com and to contact their representatives in Congress and officials in Washington to ask that a blue ribbon panel be convened to thoroughly investigate the WTC collapse. Among those also calling for the investigation are Sally Regenhard, the mother of Christian Regenhard, the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) probationary firefighter killed in the World Trade Center (WTC) attack, and founder of the Campaign for Skyscraper Safety; Give Your Voice, a civilian relatives' group headed by Michael Cartier, who lost his brother in the collapse; prominent structural engineers and fire-safety experts, and New York State Senators Charles Schumer and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. $elling Out the Investigation By Bill Manning Did they throw away the locked doors from the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire? Did they throw away the gas can used at the Happyland Social Club Fire? Did they cast aside the pressure-regulating valves at the Meridian Plaza Fire? Of course not. But essentially, that's what they're doing at the World Trade Center. For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China, perhaps never to be seen again in America until you buy your next car. Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall. Hoping beyond hope, I have called experts to ask if the towers were the only high-rise buildings in America of lightweight, center-core construction. No such luck. I made other calls asking if these were the only buildings in America with light-density, sprayed-on fireproofing. Again, no luck-they were two of thousands that fit the description. Comprehensive disaster investigations mean increased safety. They mean positive change. NASA knows it. The NTSB knows it. Does FEMA know it? No. Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members- described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the evidence for anything. Maybe we should live and work in planes. That way, if disaster strikes, we will at least be sure that a thorough investigation will help find ways to increase safety for our survivors. As things now stand and if they continue in such fashion, the investigation into the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper- and computer-generated hypotheticals. However, respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers. Rather, theory has it, the subsequent contents fires attacking the questionably fireproofed lightweight trusses and load-bearing columns directly caused the collapses in an alarmingly short time. Of course, in light of there being no real evidence thus far produced, this could remain just unexplored theory. The frequency of published and unpublished reports raising questions about the steel fireproofing and other fire protection elements in the buildings, as well as their design and construction, is on the rise. The builders and owners of the World Trade Center property, the Port Authority of New York-New Jersey, a governmental agency that operates in an accountability vacuum beyond the reach of local fire and building codes, has denied charges that the buildings' fire protection or construction components were substandard but has refused to cooperate with requests for documentation supporting its contentions. Some citizens are taking to the streets to protest the investigation sellout. Sally Regenhard, for one, wants to know why and how the building fell as it did upon her unfortunate son Christian, an FDNY probationary firefighter. And so do we. Clearly, there are burning questions that need answers. Based on the incident's magnitude alone, a full-throttle, fully resourced, forensic investigation is imperative. More important, from a moral standpoint, for the safety of present and future generations who live and work in tall buildings-and for firefighters, always first in and last out-the lessons about the buildings' design and behavior in this extraordinary event must be learned and applied in the real world. To treat the September 11 incident any differently would be the height of stupidity and ignorance. The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately. The federal government must scrap the current setup and commission a fully resourced blue ribbon panel to conduct a clean and thorough investigation of the fire and collapse, leaving no stones unturned. Firefighters, this is your call to action. Visit WTC "Investigation"?: A Call to Action, then contact your representatives in Congress and officials in Washington and help us correct this problem immediately. http://www.fireengineering.com/arti....html?id=131225

quote:

For over 130 years, Fire Engineering Magazine has provided firefighter training, news, education, and management information for fire and emergency services personnel worldwide. Articles are written by experts in the fire service and focus on lessons-learned.

quote:

I have just watched the two videos posted by colorut of Michael Hess and Barry Jennings. Still, both of you fail to prove bombs had anything to do with the WTC. Neither even mentions a bomb, but only "explosion" and "thick smoke all around us". Even if they had mentioned the word "bomb", as some on the street did, that still doesn't prove that the explosions heard were bombs. Is that what you're going to tell a judge? "People heard explosions, judge, you're going have to assume they were bombs." The judge is logically going to ask you, "How do you know what the people heard were bombs?" Go ahead, attempt to answer this question...

Just shows how retarded you are then. The time they heard explosions going off was even before the towers where hit by planes. What exactly is going off like explosions if the planes have not struck the towers then?

Pay attention dumb ass.

Remember these are people who where inside the building and where actually there giving testimony.

quote:

For over 130 years, Fire Engineering Magazine has provided firefighter training, news, education, and management information for fire and emergency services personnel worldwide. Articles are written by experts in the fire service and focus on lessons-learned.

Great sig Trancer-x, now that is a reputable source that put the ASCE away a long time ago.

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp The only problem with your story is that in this particular case, there weren't any bullet holes, or blood spatter..... In this instance, you have two victims lying side by side on a bed with a giant empty bottle of cyanide sitting between them, no blood, no bullet holes. the coroner has called this multiple suicide, and 3 people wearing tinfoil hats on the street are yelling the people were murdered with an assault rifle..... show me evidence of controlled demolition besides halfwit arguments based on youtube videos of the collapse......

Obviously you have not payed attention over the last billion posts which show hundreds of people saying explosions where going off at ground zero.

This includes the firefighters, rescue workers, victims and many more. I could understand if it was only a handful of people but we are talking hundreds if not thousands of people who where there and know exactly what they experienced.

If you cannot take into consideration eyewitness accounts you can rule out ever trying find out the reality through NIST, FEMA and your bullshit peer reviewed papers that where hindered from day one which includes the biggest disaster of them all (THE 9/11 COMMISSION).

Fuck I don't even feel sorry for you retards anymore.

quote:

With an out of control fire which burned for more than half a day.

LOL, so the building fell straight down at pratically free fall speed because of an out of control fire on one side of the building?

Yeah that makes a lot of sense,

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I see you're still grasping at straws in the effort to perpetuate the coverup.

I see you're just talking shit. I'll just skim past whatever you have to say, unless you wanna show a little respect for differing points of view.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Just shows how retarded you are then. The time they heard explosions going off was even before the towers where hit by planes. What exactly is going off like explosions if the planes have not struck the towers then? Pay attention dumb ass. Remember these are people who where inside the building and where actually there giving testimony.

Wow, great argument. No wonder your dumbass doesn't know how to formulate a case against someone, let alone, something. Keep trying champ...

quote:

Originally posted by culorut LOL, so the building fell straight down at pratically free fall speed because of an out of control fire on one side of the building? Yeah that makes a lot of sense,

So that automatically assumes the buildings structure was not compromised? Great leap of faith there...

quote:

So that automatically assumes the buildings structure was not compromised?

Well by your retarded account if the building was compromised by fire (no other building in history has collapsed due to fire) then it should have fell onto the same side the fire was, not straight down at practically free fall speed.

This ones for you superstar,

Dumb di dum dum....DUMB!!!!!

quote:

Wow, great argument. No wonder your dumbass doesn't know how to formulate a case against someone, let alone, something. Keep trying champ...

Actually I do, you just don't pay attention or obviously ignore the very apparent things in the eyewitness testimonies. It clearly states that they heard explosions going off before any buildings where struck by any planes.

Retarded? Yes you are.

quote:

Originally posted by culorut Actually I do, you just don't pay attention or obviously ignore the very apparent things in the eyewitness testimonies. It clearly states that they heard explosions going off before any buildings where struck by any planes. Retarded? Yes you are.

Wrong...It'de be nice if you showed a semblance of respect for differing points of view. Troll...

Steel buildings have fallen due to fire.

quote:

While there may be no examples of high-rise office buildings completely collapsing due to fire, it bears pointing out that there have been many steel-frame structure collapses due solely to fires. The McCormick Place exhibition hall is one such example, which collapsed in 1967 only 30 minutes after a small fire was accidentally started [23]. Another prominent example is the Mumbai High North Oil Platform [24], constructed of steel and seven stories high, which completely collapsed after burning for two hours following a shipping accident that ruptured oil lines. A third example, occurring after Dr. Griffin�s manuscript was finalized, is the collapse of the Interstate 580 overpass in the MacArthur Maze [25] near San Francisco. This overpass, supported only by steel beams, suffered no impact but collapsed due to the heat of an 8,600 gallon gasoline fire, burning in the open below, after nineteen minutes. References [23] Ellen O�Brien and Lyle Benedict (archivists), �McCormick Place Fire,� Chicago Public Library, Municipal Reference Collection, November 1996. Accessible online at http://www.chipublib.org/004chicago...mick_fire.html. [24] Colin Bailey, �Case Studies: Mumbai High North Platform Fire,� University of Manchester online whitepaper, accessible online at http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/pr...aseStudy/Histor icFires/Other/default.htm. [25] Demian Bulwa and Peter Fimrite, �Tanker Fire Destroys Part of MacArthur Maze,� San Francisco Chronicle, 29 April 2007. Accessible online at http://www.sfgate.com/cgibin/ article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt The official theory says the plane hit the ground and skidded into the Pentagon. Have you seen this? The Incredible PENTALAWN! lols

The "official" theory seems to say a lot of things which can easily be debunked.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Wrong...It'de be nice if you showed a semblance of respect for differing points of view. Troll... Steel buildings have fallen due to fire.

Why do you keep comparing apples to oranges in the effort to justify your position?

Your comparison is almost the equivillent of doing endurance ans stress tests on electric golf carts in order to certify the combat worthiness of a line of uparmored Humvee's.

It's simply preposterous, to say the least.

I tend to agree with Lt. Col. Bob Bowman's position regarding the events of 9/11.



Here's the first part of that program with Professor Kevin Barrett:

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Why do you keep comparing apples to oranges in the effort to justify your position? Your comparison is almost the equivillent of doing endurance ans stress tests on electric golf carts in order to certify the combat worthiness of a line of uparmored Humvee's. It's simply preposterous, to say the least.

The point is, if you didn't understand the first time, is that steel structures can fail due to fire. Got it?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I tend to agree with Lt. Col.

That's fine, and I respect that. I tend to agree with the NOVA documentary "Why the Towers Fell".

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton That's fine, and I respect that. I tend to agree with the NOVA documentary "Why the Towers Fell".

Probably because you either lack the ability to discern fact from fiction and establishment propaganda from truth or you're here because you're being paid to perpetuate the ongoing fraud against humanity.

I'm not making a definitive claim one way or the other but those are really the only two options that I see as being viable.

As I've said before, we've all been caught in a web of deception but it appears that you actively seek to masquerade it's threads (lies) as truths, just as a loyal employee of the Orwellian Ministry of Truth would.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.