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 culorut More than five-and-a-half years have passed since terrorists toppled the World Trade Center, and questions still remain about how the buildings came down. Researchers at Purdue University have created a computer model attempting to answer some of those questions. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by culorut The site also notes that "the National Science Foundation (NSF), the agency that funded the Purdue study, is an agency whose board was appointed by George W. Bush and confirmed by the United States Senate," and that its director, Dr. Arden L. Bement Jr. worked for employers such as General Electric Company, Battelle Northwest Laboratories, and DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), the agency responsible for the development of new technology for use by the military. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN fuck you have NO idea how the world works child |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Marc Summers Reminds me of the "six degrees of kevin bacon" |
^^ yeah, its ridiculous how these children think government(s) work. obviously no experience in the real world; learn everything they know from disreputable websites 
:/ i was hoping Purdue had released the code under FreeGNU (open-source) so that we would be able to review/revise any engineering/chemical/physical inconsistencies. I couldn't find one :/
are they liscensing it to some playstation2 game?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by SuspicionVandit :/ i was hoping Purdue had released the code under FreeGNU (open-source) so that we would be able to review/revise any engineering/chemical/physical inconsistencies. I couldn't find one :/ are they liscensing it to some playstation2 game? |
Have fun debunking this one.
FBI Knowingly Allowed Bin Laden To Personally Charter Flight After 9/11
Newly released documents prove agency let Osama's family go at his request without even questioning them.
The FBI were aware that Osama Bin Laden may have chartered one of the flights that took Bin Laden family members out of the U.S. in the days after the 9/11 attacks, yet allowed the planes to depart without even questioning them, new Agency documents reveal.
While all other air traffic had been grounded for days by the authorities they knowingly allowed the immediate family of their prime suspect behind the attacks to get into planes and fly out at Bin Laden's own request.
The previously confidential documents (PDF link) have been obtained by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act and ongoing litigation.
The documents state:
ON 9/19/01, A 727 PLANE LEFT LAX, RYAN FLT #441 TO ORLANDO, FL W/ETA (estimated time of arrival) OF 4-5PM. THE PLANE WAS CHARTERED EITHER BY THE SAUDI ARABIAN ROYAL FAMILY OR OSAMA BIN LADEN�THE LA FBI SEARCHED THE PLANE [REDACTED] LUGGAGE, OF WHICH NOTHING UNUSUAL WAS FOUND.
Traffic control reports show that the plane made four stops to pick up passengers and was then allowed to depart the United States for Paris where all passengers disembarked on 9/20/01.
The documents reveal that the FBI did not consider a single Saudi national nor any of the Bin Laden family worthy of investigative value.
Asked about the document's assertion that either bin Laden or the Saudi royals ordered the flight, an FBI spokesman said the information was inaccurate.
"There is no new information here. Osama bin Laden did not charter a
flight out of the US," FBI special agent Richard Kolko said.
"This is just an inflammatory headline by Judicial Watch to catch
people's attention. This was thoroughly investigated by the FBI."
Meredith Diliberto, an attorney with Judicial Watch, says her group has seen a first version of the documents in 2005, although the FBI had heavily redacted the texts to black out names, including all references to bin Laden.
Nevertheless, unedited footnotes in the texts allowed lawyers to
determine that bin Laden's name had been redacted.
They pressed the issue in court and on November 2006, the FBI was
ordered to re-release the documents.
http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007...m?section=world
| quote: |
| even if they did, only a very experienced strucutral engineer who happens to be a good programmer as well would be able to find the flaws.... it would all be numerical calculations (numerical integrations etc) as opposed to common structural design equations. so it would be very hard to analyze. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN fuck you have NO idea how the world works child |
This is a good read.
New 9/11 Study Has Direct Links To Government
"Independent" study financed by Feds
A newly released Purdue University animation showing how fire caused the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11 claims to be independent but in reality has been federally funded and was conducted by individuals with direct links to the Pentagon and the White House.
Earlier this week we covered the news that the new study roughly correlates with the findings of the 2005 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report and supports the official line that the airplanes stripped away crucial fireproofing material and that the weakened towers collapsed under their own weight.
While the New York Times today lauds the study as "a counterpoint to the conspiracy theories promulgated by such outspoken figures as Rosie O�Donnell", Prisonplanet.com has actually done some research into the origins of the study.
In addition to the inerrant flaws and conflicts we pointed out in our previous article, it has now come to light that the so called "independent" structural engineers behind the study are anything but.
The Study was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), a federal agency created by Congress in 1950 "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense�".
The board of the NSF was appointed by George W. Bush and confirmed by the United States Senate. Its director, Dr. Arden L. Bement Jr, has worked for the Department of defense, where he was under secretary for research and engineering, and DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), which is responsible for the development of new technology for use by the military and famed for its black op projects and offshoot offices.
Last year the Bush Administration doubled the NSF's budget to $6.02 billion.
At the time Arden L. Bement, Jr. stated:
"This is a great day for NSF, and that means it's a great day for the nation, there has been a lot of rhetoric about doubling the NSF budget, but now the Administration is behind it. The FY 2007 Budget Request is the first installment. We are grateful to the Administration for its recognition and leadership,"
In addition it turns out that structural engineer Mete Sozen, the lead investigator in the Purdue study, was also on the American Society of Civil Engineers research team that confirmed the government's story about the OKC bombing in 1995, despite the huge amounts of inconsistencies and conflicting testimony.
Coincidence?
From the ASCE web site
Mete A. Sozen, Ph.D., S.E.
Kettlehut Distinguished Professor of Structural Engineering, Purdue University
Specialty: Behavior of reinforced-concrete structures
Dr. Sozen is currently the Kettlehut Distinguished Professor of Structural Engineering at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Ind. Prior to joining Purdue in 1994, Dr. Sozen was a professor of civil engineering at the University of Illinois for over 35 years. Dr. Sozen also served on the ASCE team that studied the Murrah Federal Office Building collapse.
So while it claims to be independent the study was in fact funded by the government and carried out by long time government hired hands. The study clearly set out not to attempt to discover anything new but to prove the preconceived official fire theory.
Again this underscores the fact that a truly independent investigation into 9/11 is the only way the mountains of evidence pointing towards a controlled demolition will even be considered.
maybe its time you morons provide us with a list of credible persons who have never done a report for a government agency........ so that we can burry this controlled demolition nonsense forever
and for the record.... releasing a study by competent individuals in support of a previous theory is called experimental reproduction, and is a key factor in proving a theory to be true and accurate.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by culorut However, the website TRUTHORLIES.ORG believes that the simulation "raises more questions then answers." Josh Reeves and Mike Swenson write, "The following statement was used in the Purdue simulation: 'The weight of the aircraft's fuel, when ignited, acted like a flash flood of flaming liquid.' This is a direct contradiction of the FEMA report (which can be viewed HERE) which stated: 'despite the huge fireballs caused by the two planes crashing into the WTC towers each with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel, the fireballs did not explode or create a shock wave that would have resulted in structural damage.'� |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Philby what does that mean? the animation report describes a flash flood of burning liquid. you say it is wrong because it is a direct contradiction of the fema report saying the fuel did not explode or create shockwaves. why is that relevant? the animation report didnt say there would be an explosion or a shockwave. they said a flood of burning liquid. ? |
i love it how FEMA's analysis is acceptable when (supposedly) discrediting research done by normal people, but thoroughly dismissed when it contradicts the crazy nutbags
the entire movement are a bunch of ill-informed hypocrites.
New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
umm...is that who I think it is?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by metalgearsolid umm...is that who I think it is? |
I'll have to let you know that I missed ya and that I love every one of your posts.yeah it was too big the first time.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by metalgearsolid I'll have to let you know that I missed ya and that I love every one of your posts.yeah it was too big the first time. |
but I ONLY took a year off, though 
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X Thanks but I ONLY took a year off, though It was rejuvenating! |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by metalgearsolid Still too long. I felt that the PDD had a genious IQ with you around and when you left. The IQ sinked faster then the titanic could with Rosie O'donnel on it. |
| quote: |
| New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X Awwwwww, man - you just have to love pilots for 9/11 Truth Their version of Celebrity Jeopardy: |
trancer-x!! 
welcome back! i hope the evil government's experiments on you weren't too painful. how did you escape their black operation?
you'll be pleased to know there are a bunch of new crazies in here to join you way out left field 
and its been more than a year hasn't it? feels like ages!
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.