dubya did it

mellow_pilot · Post by **mellow_pilot** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:58 am

You don't have to heat millions of tonnes of steel, just one floor will do it. In fact, you don't even have to weaken the entire I-beam, just the rivets and rivet plates... see how easy this gets? I do understand that there is fire-proofing, and normally that would probably protect the metal structure, but the impact of an airliner might just damage that fireproofing. Concrete also doesn't do so well with impact. I'm not a structural engineer or anything, but I've done some welding in my time. Anyone who has will realise how this business of weakened metal works. (again, sorry for the hyperbole... I've done alot of metal work and construction. I've smashed my share of concrete in all sorts of ways, I've broken up steel/con structure. I've heated metal until it's pliable.) You'll notice that I haven't gone to the trouble of posting alot of links etc. That's because common sense can deal with most of the conspiracy crap without much help.

I've been looking for the stuff on flashover I was refering to. I'm not sure why you're getting such different #s, maybe I'm using the wrong term. When I find it I'll post it. (might take some time, I'm not particularly excited about spending alot of energy finding it right about now...)

Point is this, if you take 10 seconds to think about this stuff, you can file the conspiracy "evidence" along with that credit card application and Jehovah's Witnesses flyer you got in the mail... in the garbage.

swede · Post by **swede** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:43 am

goates wrote:
swede wrote:Yeah thats right, there were huge fuel storage units in bldg. 7 that mysteriously caught fire and caused the buildings free fall - how goofy of me..
Talk about completely ignoring the rather significant structural damage to the building.

There was no significant structural damage to wtc 7, if there was, put your money up or shut up..There is no doubt that wtc7 was leveled by controlled demolition, the silverstein interview in which the owner states "we made the decision to pull it", refering to controlled demo, should be enough proof on it's own, without the photographic evidence. Also and once again, who benefited from the crimes of 911 - did Al Qaida? The military industrial complex, which Dwight Eisenhower eloquently warned about in his retirement speech, is the only entity which benefited. Iraq has been decimated, Afghanistan is a protracted mess, and no one in the upper echelons gives a hoot what became of OBL, who was incidentally, a product of the CIA from as far back as the 1980's. If you want to pin a crime on someone, look at who had anything to gain by it.

goates · Post by **goates** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:48 am

swede wrote:
goates wrote:
swede wrote:Yeah thats right, there were huge fuel storage units in bldg. 7 that mysteriously caught fire and caused the buildings free fall - how goofy of me..
Talk about completely ignoring the rather significant structural damage to the building.
There was no significant structural damage to wtc 7, if there was, put your money up or shut up..

I already did. Read the links I posted and explain to everyone what is wrong with them if you think they're wrong.

swede · Post by **swede** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:04 pm

Maybe you could explain why a government agency publishes a voluminous report to do with wtc 7's collapse, several years late, while the 911 commission report completely ignored it? I can explain, they had to counteract the gaping hole which all 911 skeptics were referencing, and needed enough time to conjure up an explanation, pure obfuscation and claptrap at that.

goates · Post by **goates** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 12:55 pm

swede wrote:Maybe you could explain why a government agency publishes a voluminous report to do with wtc 7's collapse, several years late, while the 911 commission report completely ignored it? I can explain, they had to counteract the gaping hole which all 911 skeptics were referencing, and needed enough time to conjure up an explanation, pure obfuscation and claptrap at that.

And once again you ignore the many photos of structural damage and witness accounts of multiple fires in the building. Are you trying to say that the many photos I linked to are all false?

Also, please explain how leaving WTC7 out of the commisions report means that there is a conspiracy involved? All it says to me is that it was left out with no evidence one way or the other as to why. You saying it was done to cover something up doesn't make it fact.

edutazah · Post by **edutazah** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 pm

!sfrums eht saw ti dog ot raews I

Dash-Ate · Post by **Dash-Ate** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 4:43 pm

hmmmm: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... Found=true

Coninky-dink?

swede · Post by **swede** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:16 pm

Funny how atc tapes from 911 were mysteriously destroyed, they must have met the same fate as tapes that showed the 757 skimming low level over the Pentalawn, as opposed to the couple of frames in existence, which show the explosive flash of "something" hitting the building. If they want to finish off the "conspiracy theorists" then just give over the goods, proof needs evidence, so lets see it! Other items that were disposed of quickly were the million or so tons of steel structure from the 3 collapsed buildings. There were no metalurgy tests done, the materials were very securely stored and rapidly shipped off to China. Maybe the evidence of thermite causing extensive molten metal burning prior to collapse had something to do with that decision.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/cont ... oltenmetal