|
Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11? (pg. 178)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
No, it's soudn because it's in agreement with known laws and theorems. You've never studied discrete mathematics have you? |
oh really? and which "laws and theorems" in particular? (in case youre wondering, it takes more than a little mathematical equation to represent the collapse of a building.)
are we going to go back to talking about how physics is an exact science and completely unprepared to adequately explain the nature of a sky scraper collapsing? there's a reason people get engineers to build buildings and not physicists. (and no, i dont recall doing discrete mathematics).
FYI, there's nothing about the official story that isn't in agreement with known laws and theorems, the only people that cry out about "breaking the laws of physics" are conspiracy theorists who completely misunderstand how a controlled demolition works.
having an argument that is in agreement with known laws is all well and good. its still a completely different story to get that argument tested by other experts. so again, i ask you for the peer-review in any respected scientific journal.
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
No, I've brought up several other points in the past, problem is, it didn't suit the negligent flawed analysis and theorising necessary for the state sactioned conspiracy theory. |
fair enough, you'll forgive me if i can't remember the entirety of the dozen or so 911 threads ;)
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Colonel actually never counter argued a single point I brought up, but simply obfuscated it with other possibilities with out presenting any reasonable need for adjustment based on probability or any other compelling justification. I eventually got sick wasting my breath, time and energy as the only repsonse I reveiced in this thread were irrelevant rants and non sequitors. |
well he did from where i was sitting. especially the contrast he drew between physics and civil engineering, and their relative differences concerning an ability to adequately represent something like the collapse of a sky scraper.
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
don't beleive what you don't know happened, it makes life easier to beleive... and remember what you see is not necisarily real just what may be real.
reality is fabricated and granted by consent of those who matter --- remember life is full of lies. |
blah blah irrelevant nonsense. gotcha. you and trancer-x should have babies, you'd get on perfectly. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
There is the theory that at some point thermite (which is cement (potentially somewhere in the building) the basement potentially ignited causing high heat on the stress columbs causing some to collapse from the bottom.. some say it may have been insurance that this devestating situation... which would cause problems but just come off as a highly successful terrorist attack on america.. could be made something more... A CAUSE. |
the only people that still trott out the stupid thermite theory are those that have NFI about controlled demolitions. thermite is completely incapable of bringing down a building.
i would like to ask you why are their no reports of drilling? you know, because thermite needs to be in contact with the steel to do anything, and the core columns of the WTCs were encased in at least an inch of concrete.
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
ISI, CIA, MI6 and NATO COUNTRY intelligence communities were linked in some form or another.. the fact is ... if the airlineres were brought in then basically it was the actsof those who put the plane into the building not all the white collar managers out there... but by the person who pulled the trigger whether Mossad via remote control cameras (orjust to record it.. they new somehow it might happen to... maybe) |
there has never been a controlled demolition triggered by remote. it is too inaccurate and unstable in what is a very precise environment (another reason why thermite simply could not have been used). |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
THERMITE IS THE CEMENT.. CEMENT IS USED IN THE FOUNDATION.. YOU DON'T NEED DRILLING SINCE THE SUPPORT GIRDERS ARE IN CONTACT WITH THE FOUNDATION. I COULD BE MISTAKEN AS I CAN'T SAY I KNOW HOW THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED IN FULL ONLY PARTS OF THIS. |
im not sure what youre talking about, but thermite is an incendiary compound, not "cement". its simply not possible to do a clandestine controlled demolition, its too complicated and takes too much preparation and things like drilling to ensure explosives are at the right spot. oh, and from every report ive managed to find, YES, there is a requisite for drilling the concrete that reinforced the mimimal (internal) skeleton of the WTCs.
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
I wasn't stating the demolition was by remote -although that might be possible without issue the difficult for example do cell phones work within the WTC.. all thatis needed is a cell phone.. |
another fallacy. controlled demolitions are incredibly precise and need more than "a cellphone". read up on controlled demolitions if you dont believe me. that's the reason ALL controlled demolitions ever undertaken have used detonator wire/cord etc not remote controls.
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
bear in mind though this stuff was NOT just the WTC in whole the day ended with ranking pentagon officials stated DEAD. and a hole in the outer wall of the pentagon. There are many really is this so situation I don't know what happened I have my own beleif based upon my interactions and the course of the 24 hours preceding being woken up and told that a plane was headed toward the pentagon or something saying they'll shoot it down and going back to bed.. I had a really bad night punched a cement wall hard twice scraping my fist the night before in a blind furry of angst.. really 911 in many ways was a strange twist in my life, and because of the course of events of discussing things - discussions which involved planes being flown into buildings war etc... I consider my verion more probable.. there is lots of information... and in the big story of what is out there whether true or not... |
um, ok? |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Was that at the time the owner of the building was in a secure location meeting with an up and up or something...
after the first planes hit... he was moved to a military site with many other highly influential Americans (likely because he is attached to COG operations... or something..
|
first off, the owners of the WTC buildings are the state of new york and new jersey, through an agency called the port authority of NY and NJ. The building was leased to a native new yorker who is filthy rich, larry silverstein. there is zero possibility he had anything to do with it or knew about it. he grew up in manhattan, went to school in the city, and knew many people in the building. i met the guy, he's very very patriotic. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Smoke less crack--- go to school and learn something.
WTF BIA I havn't suggesteda clandestine operation that would be incriminating to a few good men.
Your civilization is primitive and barbaric.
Don't care - there are soundless drilling systes..although I havn't even suggested an intentional government sanctioned event if they did then it wouldn't matter you wonder why the toilets cost 20000$ and when they flush they don't make noise. Although a laser or otherwise there are lots of technicalities and I really am not in a position to comment on a government conspiracy.
You come off as incredibly uneducated. How many more lines would you like for my FBI file? I've read about explosives as a kid growing up - I have this fantasy of having sex with Chelsea clinton while putting dynamite into whatever orafices I wasn't using .. in the oval office... while Barrack and Bill watched screaming RIDE ERR my natural response after the euhhh would be the only thing that can make this better is if I can press both red buttons at ONCE.
Ok moron factor included I'll help you put the letters together q u o... t.... e.
Dude it ain't hard your making it out to be something all big an mighty the only this is really hard to apply a few thousand degrees of heat to an area surface.. I support vibrational stress in the structure caused the cement (which is made of the same chemical ingredients as thermite) to vapourize and heat since the girders absorbed the structural stress it was like strickinga match the vibrational heat transfered to the foundation.. and was so immense that it allowed the heat level needed to ignite the thermite causing a chain reaction... when the heat from the thermite/cement came around it melted the girders.
PS FBI I'm a good guy KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK GUYS AND GALS. I'M A LAW ABIDING PACIFIST WITH AN IRRESPONSIBLE SENSE OF HUMOUR. PLEASE DON'T ANAL PROBE ME. DON'T LET HOMELAND SECURITY HEAR THOSE WORDS EVERYTIME I'M DEPORTED TRYING TO CROSS THE BORDER LEGALLY TO ENTER LATIN AMERICA!!!
um, ok? |
im uneducated? who is the fool that can't string a proper, coherent sentence together? :conf: |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Lets not do personal attacks cause that is not nice. And we are nice people, right. |
no, im not really. at least, not to conspiracy theorists.
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Dude you do come off as not knowing anything about thermodynamics or chemistry... it is like rocket science so no offense. |
youre right, i know all about either.
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
I didn't know thermite and cement have identical properties. Maybe they don't maybe I'm just BSing you..
High Alumina Cement - Suitable bauxites contain 50 to 60 percent alumina, up to 25 percent iron oxide
Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of aluminium powder and a metal oxide which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not an explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small target for a short period of time. |
thankyou, that's all i was asking for :) so, thermite has some similar characteristics as some cement, gotcha. |
|
|
| Zharen |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
first off, the owners of the WTC buildings are the state of new york and new jersey, through an agency called the port authority of NY and NJ. The building was leased to a native new yorker who is filthy rich, larry silverstein. there is zero possibility he had anything to do with it or knew about it. he grew up in manhattan, went to school in the city, and knew many people in the building. i met the guy, he's very very patriotic. |
And he also took a record breaking insurance coverage on the towers 6 months before 9/11 and made out with 4.6 billion dollars. You'd think that would be enough for him, but Noooo. Then he goes and sues the airline companies.
source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/n...ml?ref=nyregion
| quote: | Larry A. Silverstein, who has won nearly $4.6 billion in insurance payments to cover his losses and help him rebuild at the World Trade Center site, is seeking $12.3 billion in damages from airlines and airport security companies for the 9/11 attack.
Mr. Silverstein, the developer of ground zero, sought the damages, whose amount was not previously known, in a claim filed in 2004, that says the airlines and airport security companies failed to prevent terrorists from hijacking the planes used to destroy the buildings.
His case was consolidated last week with similar, earlier lawsuits brought by families of some victims of the attack and by other property owners. But in seeking $12.3 billion, he is by far the biggest claimant in the litigation.
The size of Mr. Silverstein’s claim was revealed last week at a status conference on the litigation in United States District Court in Manhattan.
The claims by the parties involved total about $23 billion, and Mr. Silverstein’s claim for such a large chunk could jeopardize claims from other businesses and property owners, according to defense lawyers. A lawyer for the victims’ families, Donald Migliori, said he was confident that their claims would not be affected because they would take priority over the property claims.
A lawyer for the airlines, Desmond Barry, said that if Mr. Silverstein won his claim, he could push the total claims beyond the amount of insurance that the airlines and security companies have available. “There ain’t that much insurance,” Mr. Barry said.
The federal government has capped the liability at the amount of available insurance, to avoid bankrupting the airlines. The exact amount of insurance available is still being explored in the court proceedings.
Richard A. Williamson, a lawyer for Mr. Silverstein, said at the court conference on March 18 that Mr. Silverstein was seeking damages to compensate him for continuing losses at the site. Mr. Silverstein, through his company, World Trade Center Properties, has a 99-year lease, worth $3.2 billion, on four buildings at the site, including the fallen twin towers. He signed the lease in July 2001, just six weeks before the attack.
Since the attack, Mr. Silverstein has been paying rent to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey on towers that no longer exist, his lawyer told the judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein. Mr. Williamson said that his client had also lost rental income from about 400 tenants.
Dara McQuillan, a spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, said that the $12.3 billion represented $8.4 billion for the replacement value of the destroyed buildings and $3.9 billion in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the Port Authority and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings.
Mr. Barry, speaking for the airlines, contended that Mr. Silverstein had been more than compensated by the nearly $4.6 billion insurance settlement, reached after almost six years of litigation. He argued that Mr. Silverstein was entitled to the market value of the property, which he said had been established by the $3.2 billion lease.
Judge Hellerstein expressed skepticism about Mr. Silverstein’s claim, and asked why he had not stemmed his losses by just “walking away.”
Turning to Mr. Williamson, Judge Hellerstein asked: “What’s the nature of your recovery?”
To which Mr. Williamson replied, “For damages suffered by the events of 9/11, not value. Damages.”
Mr. Williamson said that the lease required Mr. Silverstein to rebuild and to continue paying rent.
“And so I’m putting to you if you walked away from the lease, you would lose the value of the lease,” Judge Hellerstein said. “Would you have a further obligation to pay money?”
Mr. Williamson replied, “You have to examine that question. “But to me that’s not the test of what are our damages.”
Judge Hellerstein pressed Mr. Williamson to put a dollar figure on the damages. “I don’t think it’s necessary to know the precise amount,” the judge said. “I think some order of magnitude would be appropriate.”
When Mr. Williamson balked, Mr. Barry jumped in.
“I think their claim is $12.3 billion,” he said.
“Plus prejudgement interest,” Mr. Williamson confirmed.
To which the judge tartly replied, “We shouldn’t forget that.”
Judge Hellerstein ordered Mr. Silverstein to provide more documentation of his claim, or risk losing it.
Mr. McQuillan, the spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, said on Wednesday the developer felt both an obligation under his lease and a moral obligation to rebuild, rather than walk away. He said that the insurance companies who paid him would be repaid if he prevails.
Plaintiffs also revealed that after a spate of settlements, there are seven wrongful death cases and two injury cases remaining, out of more than 90 filed.
Those who sued represent just a small fraction of the casualties on Sept. 11. Most of the victims of the attack and their families chose to take the compensation offered through a federal fund, forgoing their right to sue.
Mr. Migliori, the lawyer for victims’ survivors, said he believed that the claimants with property-damage claims — including Mr. Silverstein and some insurance companies trying to recoup their payments — would allow the death and injury cases to get priority in payment of damages.
The judge declined to set any trial date in the case, saying that it would be “fictitious,” but set a fact-finding deadline at the end of this year. Any trials in the case appear to be more than a year away. |
But hey, if I was making out with 16 billion after 9/11, I'd be very very very very patriotic too... |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
vibrational stress in the structure caused the cement (which is made of the same chemical ingredients as thermite) to vapourize and heat since the girders absorbed the structural stress it was like strickinga match the vibrational heat transfered to the foundation.. and was so immense that it allowed the heat level needed to ignite the thermite causing a chain reaction... when the heat from the thermite/cement came around it melted the girders. |
could you elaborate on this for me? im unaware how the cement is "vapourized"? as well as how the vibrational stress is causing extreme heat? and are you saying thermite was put their deliberately to bring the towers down, or that the "thermite concrete" was just how the building was built? surely, despite cement and thermite's apparent similarities, there is a fundamental difference between the two substances? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| it's my understanding that the only concrete in the building were the floors. 4 inch concrete slabs that were supported structurally by the independently load bearing trusses of each floor. otherwise there was no load bearing concrete supporting the building. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zharen
And he also took a record breaking insurance coverage on the towers 6 months before 9/11 and made out with 4.6 billion dollars. |
false.
| quote: |
As we write the insurance payments are not going to reach $7.1 billion. The current situation is $4.6 billion at a maximum, although this may be subject to change (up or down) as a result of court rulings.
And of course this isn't profit for Silverstein. The money is being provided for him to rebuild the WTC complex, and it turns out that's quite expensive ($6.3 billion in April 2006, see here).
$4.6 billion in insurance money, $6.3 billion in costs? Not such a great deal, then. What’s more, don’t imagine the insurance companies have handed over all of this money. As we write (June 2006) there are other problems |
http://www.911myths.com/html/windfall.html
| quote: | Originally posted by Zharen
You'd think that would be enough for him, but Noooo. Then he goes and sues the airline companies.
But hey, if I was making out with 16 billion after 9/11, I'd be very very very very patriotic too... |
gee, a litigious american? you don't say :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Zharen |
Well let's see, 6.3 billion in costs, 4.6 billion in insurance payments, and if he has his way in the lawsuit, he'll get an extra 12.3 billion. So, 16.9 - 6.3 billion = 10.6 billion in profit. Guess he is getting a good deal out of it after all.
And I'll meet your :rolleyes: with :crazy: :tongue3 |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zharen
And he also took a record breaking insurance coverage on the towers 6 months before 9/11 and made out with 4.6 billion dollars. You'd think that would be enough for him, but Noooo. Then he goes and sues the airline companies. |
are you saying the buildings were un-insured prior to the six months before 9/11? :rolleyes:
by law those buildings had to be insured from the day they broke ground to build the damn things then throughout the life of the structure.
have you ever had to renew an insurance policy for whatever reason? |
|
|
|
|
