Quake3World

Maiden wrote:hmm.... lets see.....

WTC sits in the heart of one of the most populated areas on Earth.
Bringing down the towers would be the biggest implosion in history, by a huge mother of a margin!
Tons and Tons of explosives.
Miles and Miles of cable
Hundreds of super invisible ninja like demolition experts.
Making them fall the way they did would require the most precise use of demolition technology available by the worlds greatest demo experts, with NO miscalculations.

No, it can obviously happen that way by complete accident. Why do we even bother spending so much time rigging buildings when it's obvious they will implode on themselves naturally with just a fire?

Maiden wrote:Now lets fly a 737 into them first just to add a little unknown to the equation and see if we can still pull of the prefect implosion.
All that without the 150,000 people that work there or the million or so that live within spitting distance ever seeing anything fishy going on for the months it would take to set up.
yeah, right.

In the RICO lawsuit being filed in Pennsylvania (Rodriguezvs.Bush et al), it's stated that there was a "power down" condition on the weekend of the 8-9th, for a "cabling upgrade," in which the power, along with the security cameras, were out.

Fender wrote:

Freakaloin wrote:http://www.prisonplanet.com/pullit.mp3

Yes, I have heard that before and it doesn't matter. It is irrelevant. Because one building was rigged to go has nothing to do with 2 others.

cept the govt denies it...

http://www.infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV

Fender wrote:

R00k wrote:And why do you find this explanation so hard to believe, but have no reservations about a politician's statement that explains the collapse with a theory that has only destroyed one other building -- one that was rigged with explosives?

Who said that my conclusions have ANYTHING to do with some politician's statements? I doubt you'll find another person as untrusting and skeptical of the government as I am.

Okay, point taken.

What do you believe, then, caused the collapse to happen the way it did?

A PLANE FLEW IN TO THE FUCKING BUILDING

Freakaloin wrote:cept the govt denies it...

http://www.infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV

left hand... right hand... doesn't matter

our government has become so large, out of control and inept it is amazing it functions at all

dammit i hate how the submit/preview buttons are backwards here, i'm used to my forum where they are in the regular position

Maiden wrote:

R00k wrote: Because that's the way demolitions of that kind of building are done.

That is why demolition of large buildings is such a precise and well-planned undertaking to begin with.

demo of that kind of building?
its never been done.
WTC was four times taller than the tallest building ever imploded.
and i wouldn't call flying an airliner into the side of it being precise.

Demo of a building that shaped -- opposed to one the shape of the sports dome.

Flying an airliner into it has nothing to do with the precision. If it has been stated by the architects and engineers of the buildings that they were built to withstand impacts from 757's, what better justification in the world would there be?
You know that you have an ostensible reason for their collapse that will be widely accepted, and you know that the buildings will still be stable enough for a controlled demolition afterwards. Bring down buildings 1 & 2, and then bring down the center of operations (building 7), then remove and melt every piece of steel from the site, and you have absolutely no evidence of anything happening except a pile of finely powdered concrete and rubble.

Fender wrote:A PLANE FLEW IN TO THE FUCKING BUILDING

That's not an explanation; you haven't addressed a single thing I've said. From that statement, I'm not even sure you've even read a quarter of what I've said.

If you find this discussion so irritating, please quit being hostile and/or stop addressing me.

I didn't put your name in the title.

Ok, I'll humor you for a minute. Why was all this done, supposedly? I firmly believe that the Bush administration manufactured the Iraq war in order to help GWB get re-elected in 2004, but I just can't believe that we would ignore, assist or create an attack on our own soil towards that or any end.

R00k wrote:I didn't put your name in the title.

Too fucking bad. You posted it on the Internet.

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/--=Close-up%20of%20south%20tower%20collapse.mpg

looks pretty obvious to me what happened

That's actually amazing Puff. If you look at that, you can see explosions going off in that video clip - probably more clear than any I have seen before.

If you look right between the 4 and 5 second mark, you can very clearly see a ring of debris shooting out of the building well below where the rest of the clouds are.

Play it a few times and watch during that 1.5 seconds or so.

Where did you find that video?

Fender wrote:Ok, I'll humor you for a minute. Why was all this done, supposedly? I firmly believe that the Bush administration manufactured the Iraq war in order to help GWB get re-elected in 2004, but I just can't believe that we would ignore, assist or create an attack on our own soil towards that or any end.

I understand that. But do you personally have a belief as to what made the towers collapse? Do you simply not care?

Do you think the victims' families shouldn't care? Or do you think they should accept the dubious conspiracy theory of Bush-appointed politicians, even though you wouldn't necessarily accept it?

R00k wrote:

Maiden wrote:

R00k wrote: Because that's the way demolitions of that kind of building are done.

That is why demolition of large buildings is such a precise and well-planned undertaking to begin with.

demo of that kind of building?
its never been done.
WTC was four times taller than the tallest building ever imploded.
and i wouldn't call flying an airliner into the side of it being precise.

Demo of a building that shaped -- opposed to one the shape of the sports dome.

Flying an airliner into it has nothing to do with the precision. If it has been stated by the architects and engineers of the buildings that they were built to withstand impacts from 757's, what better justification in the world would there be?


remove and melt every piece of steel from the site, and you have absolutely no evidence of anything happening except a pile of finely powdered concrete and rubble.

The collapses were not 'precise'

http://www.implosionworld.com/wtc.htm

DID THE WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS ACTUALLY “IMPLODE”?
No. They collapsed in an uncontrolled fashion, causing extensive damage to surrounding structures, roadways and utilities. Although when viewed from a distance the towers appeared to have telescoped almost straight down, a closer look at video replays reveal sizeable portions of each building breaking free during the collapse, with the largest sections--some as tall as 30 or 40 stories--actually “laying out” in several directions. The outward failure of these sections is believed to have caused much of the significant damage to adjacent structures, and smaller debris caused structural and cosmetic damage to hundreds of additional buildings around the perimeter of the sit



DID THE TERRORISTS PLANT ANY BOMBS IN THE BUILDINGS IN ADVANCE TO GUARANTEE THEIR DEMISE?
To our knowledge there is no evidence whatsoever to support this assertion. Analysis of video and photographs of both towers clearly shows that the initial structural failure occurred at or near the points where the planes impacted the buildings. Furthermore, there is no visible or audible indication that explosives or any other supplemental catalyst was used in the attack.





Also there were many professionals (including demolition experts) who worked on the removal of debris who were actually tasked with identifying different debris etc. They haven't reported evidence of demolition.


http://www.implosionworld.com/wtc2.htm

Project Managers from all five primary demolition contractors that worked to clear the World Trade Center site in New York appeared together for the first time recently to answer questions and relate their experiences in a compelling seminar at the National Association of Demolition Contractor's (NADC) 30th Annual Convention in Orlando, Florida USA.

Several hundred delegates attended the highly anticipated "no-question-is-off-limits" Q&A session. Speakers included David Griffin Jr., Vice President of D.H. Griffin, Inc. and Demolition Consultant for the Ground Zero site, Mike Richman of Gateway Demolition, Ed King of Mazzocchi Wrecking, Jon Manafort of Manafort Brothers and Dennis Dannenfelser of Yannuzzi Demolition & Disposal. Each firm was responsible for one quadrant of the site's cleanup during the six months after 9/11.

it was Dannenfelser who provided some of the most compelling observations. Having spent months coordinating retrieval efforts at the Fresh Kills Landfill in Staten Island, he spoke of working closely with the FBI and other agencies in developing various types of debris filtering machines, including one that could recognize small amounts of "human material" for DNA identification. He also spoke of retrieving, "about 10,000 pieces of the airplanes, which I kept in a pile by my truck for safekeeping."

u read my post rook?

So are you saying that if these building had collapsed "naturally" without some sort of boost from explosives that there would be no such "ring of debris?" You have no way of knowing this. It is not possible to come to that conclusion logically.

R00k wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/--=Close-up%20of%20south%20tower%20collapse.mpg

looks pretty obvious to me what happened

That's actually amazing Puff. If you look at that, you can see explosions going off in that video clip - probably more clear than any I have seen before.

If you look right between the 4 and 5 second mark, you can very clearly see a ring of debris shooting out of the building well below where the rest of the clouds are.

Play it a few times and watch during that 1.5 seconds or so.

Where did you find that video?

It's amazing how you and I see different things.

What I see is the beginning of collapse. The debris is being forced out from below by the dynamic weight of the floors above which have begun to fall. The exterior of the building finally buckles from the pressure of the debris which is being forced down and outwards.

That doesn't make sense to you?

I found the video using my good pal google.

edit: look at the first 2 seconds of the video, before the 'explosions' happen. You can actually see the corner of the building collapsing.

R00k wrote:I understand that. But do you personally have a belief as to what made the towers collapse? Do you simply not care?

Do you think the victims' families shouldn't care? Or do you think they should accept the dubious conspiracy theory of Bush-appointed politicians, even though you wouldn't necessarily accept it?

I'm not a civil, mechanical or structural engineer. My best frame of references is a few mech/civil engineering courses I had to take in college. The best I can do is believe the experts. The professor emertus of structural engineering at MIT among dozens of other in the field engineers have stated that the heat in the building was hot enough to degrade the steel enough to allow a collapse to happen. And yes, I've read some of the "debunking" of those statements/theories. The best they can come up with is something like "look it happened differently here!" That's not sufficient. The complexity of this system is nearly incomprehensible and its behavior under circumstances such as this is completely unpredictable. Standard chaos theory.

R00k wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:this photograph for example... do you see the charges in this photo? I can't.

There is debris flying outward at least 50 feet, or 5 floors, below where the upper floors are impacting.

There's also an obvious explosion in that picture.

That's because there's a huge amount of material coming down, and it's pushing out everything that's beneath it. The smoke, fire, dust, and debris can't go through the floor below it, and so it goes out.
I fail to see the obvious explosion of which you speak. I see fire and burning debris being psuhed out of the interior of the building.

i find the ppl who believe the govt story hav't really researched at all...once they have they no it was an inside job...

i'll say it again:

in the video that puff posted, there is a small flash before the building collapses.

riddla wrote:u no?

fuck u...

:lol:

heres it..if u believe the govt's conspiracy theory then ur a moron...period...

Freakaloin wrote:i find the ppl who believe the govt story hav't really researched at all...once they have they no it was an inside job...

sorry geoff but you've been unable to distinguish shit from shinola when you've undertaken your 'research'

[xeno]Julios wrote:u read my post rook?

The first time I read it I thought you were talking about the same thing I was, didin't notice you put a time in there.

I see what you're talking about now though, and I didn't notice it before. It could maybe be something else, but it certainly looks like a small explosive blast, and it's at the same level and the same time as the first outward blast ring.

That's interesting.

Anybody here remember when they found that WTC painting in iraq?


link!

...and look at this shit recently found in iraq...conspiracy?


3d Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division soldiers found this painting. The caption to the mural of Mr. Hussein and the WTC say; "The Right Honorable, Mr. President, Leader, Holy Warrior Saddam Hussein (may God protect him)." The badge between Mr. Hussein and the WTC at the middle and top of the mural says;
"Allah protect Iraq and Saddam."

...still living in a dream world?

Time to let the torture begins folks...Saddam must be skinned alive

that couldnt have been planted at all