Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 24, 2013, 08:19:24 AM
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Conspiracy 9-11  (Read 368 times)
Mefistofeles
Ace

Posts: 2,051

Join Date: Apr, 2002


« on: August 18, 2004, 04:51:15 AM »

Although this issue has been brought before I would like to bring to life once more:

Was there a 9-11 Conspiracy

Did the US know there was going to be an attack in September?
Why did World Trade Center 7 Collapse ?
Why weren't Randy Glass' warning about 9-11 taken seriously?
9-11 Dossier with other disturbing questions

Logged
Mefistofeles
Ace

Posts: 2,051

Join Date: Apr, 2002


« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2004, 04:51:15 AM »

Conspiracy 9-11
Logged
UglyShoes
Ace

Posts: 4,934

Join Date: Mar, 2003


« Reply #2 on: August 20, 2004, 03:16:40 AM »

started trying to read the WTC 7 one,  can't take anything serious with a color scheme that is nearly impossible to read.  Plus the whole "no steal building collapse do to fire yada yada" thing is crap. Steal buildings fall a lot in fire, just most are small.  Secondly few large buildings like the WTC had ever caught fire much past one room.   No buildings had ever experianced a fire like that hit the WTCs. The fire protection on buildings has a time rating, it's ment that there will be an effort to put the fire out, this didn't happen with WTC7,  so in time there was no protection for it, plus any damage from the other falls, so it went under.
Logged
JungleJoe
Ace

Posts: 1,659

Join Date: Apr, 2004


« Reply #3 on: August 20, 2004, 06:19:00 AM »

i find it amazing they lasted as long as they did. in many ways it saved many more lives then were killed by its design.
Logged
Connor
Ace

Posts: 3,192

Join Date: Nov, 2002


« Reply #4 on: August 20, 2004, 08:49:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by: UglyShoes
started trying to read the WTC 7 one,  can't take anything serious with a color scheme that is nearly impossible to read.  Plus the whole "no steal building collapse do to fire yada yada" thing is crap. Steal buildings fall a lot in fire, just most are small.  Secondly few large buildings like the WTC had ever caught fire much past one room.   No buildings had ever experianced a fire like that hit the WTCs. The fire protection on buildings has a time rating, it's ment that there will be an effort to put the fire out, this didn't happen with WTC7,  so in time there was no protection for it, plus any damage from the other falls, so it went under.


I have to agree that the pictures look clearly like a controlled collapse though. If it was fire based, the weakest link would go first and drag the building towards that point (think oklahoma where sections fell but not the whole thing.) That is virtually straight down as if the collumns have been blown out in a controlled/staged explosion.

The question would have to be why?

there are two obvious possibilities.
1. To stop the fire getting further out of control and collapsing into a nearby building.
2. To dispose of any "information" that was stored in the building. Especially documents belonging to the CIA and SS, and in such a position that access to those items may have been impossible to control had the building not been collapsed. (could make a great heist movie)

But you are right about the terrible colour scheme.
Logged
Mefistofeles
Ace

Posts: 2,051

Join Date: Apr, 2002


« Reply #5 on: August 20, 2004, 03:34:55 PM »

One thing that troubles me about 7 WTC is that there is lack of pronounced structural damage on the exterior.  

Also the collapse is very "neat" and tidy.  Again if there could structural damage occur in a way where everything would suddenly go simultaneously?  Why didn't one section go first?  

Paper and plastic can burn for a very long time.  I'd like to see how much smoke was coming from WTC 7.  There don't be appear to be any large fires near the building's exterior.   That's what troubles me I don't see any large fires that one could possibly engulf or destroy the building as a whole.

Regarding the fire factor.  If I'm not mistaken the MGM hotel burned for a longer period of time without a falling.   WTC 7 is a much wider and  possibly shorter building and should be equally if not more resilient to strucutral damage; assuming the use of similar materials and construction techniques.

If you want to see a fire that could destroy a buildings structure the MGM Grand is definite it.  Yet this fire is far more intense and visually prominent:

MGM Grand Fire

The smoke from fire at WTC 7 does not appear to be anything on the scale of what happened at the MGM Grand.    Yet that building didn't collapse.

Even if there is a reasonable explanation for the collapse I would like to hear it.  In my mind there are too many unanswered questions regarding 9-11.

     
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: