9/11 Conspiracy

Xterminator45 · Mayor's Aide Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 52

I know this might be going a bit far, but let's see what you think of this conspiracy? But the evidence is truly remarkable...

As with the Towers One and Two theories, Building Seven is thought by some to have collapsed as a result of a controlled demolition. Numerous angles of the fires and collapse were captured with video and photographs.

The collapse of WTC 7 was an event that initially baffled even the most experienced structural engineers. Building Seven was not struck by aircraft nor were the fires inside caused or sustained by jet fuel. The official working hypothesis suggests Building 7 collapsed as a result of structural damage from the collapsing Towers in addition to prolonged fires throughout. Further discussion of the intensity and severity of the fires is mentioned below. Engineers refer to this type of destruction as a ?progressive collapse.?

Much of the ammunition for the demolition theory comes from the visual observation of the actual collapse. The structure fell symmetrically in just under seven seconds, coming to rest mostly within the building?s original floor plan. Videos of the event often leave average viewers in disbelief that such an event could have occurred as no plane hit the building.

Read all about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_domestic_conspiracy_theory

phil · Mayor Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 174 Location: Seattle

omg....whatever!

lpstong · Posted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 10:13 am Post subject:

Here is an article I came across about the 9/11 theory.

Y. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC

By Elaine Jarvik
Deseret Morning News
The physics of 9/11 ? including how fast and symmetrically one of the World Trade Center buildings fell ? prove that official explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a Brigham Young University physics professor.
In fact, it's likely that there were "pre-positioned explosives" in all three buildings at ground zero, says Steven E. Jones.
In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds his voice to those of previous skeptics, including the authors of the Web site www.wtc7.net, whose research Jones quotes. Jones' article can be found at www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.
Stuart Johnson, Deseret Morning News"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three (WTC) buildings," BYU physics professor Steven E. Jones says. Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar energy at BYU, is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation "guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations.
"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes ? which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes.
As for speculation about who might have planted the explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually go there. There's no point in doing that until we do the scientific investigation."
Previous investigations, including those of FEMA, the 9/11 Commission and NIST (the National Institutes of Standards and Technology), ignore the physics and chemistry of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, to the Twin Towers and the 47-story building known as WTC 7, he says. The official explanation ? that fires caused structural damage that caused the buildings to collapse ? can't be backed up by either testing or history, he says.
Jones acknowledges that there have been "junk science" conspiracy theories about what happened on 9/11, but "the explosive demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not 'junk science.' "

document.writeln(AAMB6); var bnum=new Number(Math.floor(99999999 * Math.random())+1); document.write('');
In a 9,000-word article that Jones says will be published in the book "The Hidden History of 9/11," by Elsevier, Jones offers these arguments:
? The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" ? and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."

? No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.

? WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors ? and intact steel support columns ? the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.

? With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing ? and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."

? Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.

? Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel ? and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.

? Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

? Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.

Jones says he became interested in the physics of the WTC collapse after attending a talk last spring given by a woman who had had a near-death experience. The woman mentioned in passing that "if you think the World Trade Center buildings came down just due to fire, you have a lot of surprises ahead of you," Jones remembers, at which point "everyone around me started applauding."
Following several months of study, he presented his findings at a talk at BYU in September.
Jones says he would like the government to release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage for "independent scrutiny." He would also like to analyze a small sample of the molten metal found at Ground Zero.

lpstong · Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 1:29 pm Post subject: 9/11 and the new US $20 bill

I got this in my email. I couldnt cut and paste right ot get this up right. So I googled it and here is a site that shows 9/11 and the $20 bill. remember it only works with the newer bill. But here is the link. Give it a minute to fully download with the graphics.

http://www.glennbeck.com/news/05172002.shtml

julian4239 · Mayor Joined: 07 Jun 2006 Posts: 211

So impact of a jumbo plane and the high energy and heat of jet fuel had nothing to do with the destruction of the towers?

Oh my.

Thumperfive · Mayor Joined: 11 Jun 2006 Posts: 222

it's easier to believe a government conspiracy than to accept that there is pure evil out there in the world and men who would kill innocents for nothing more than the promise of a few virgins in their "heaven."

Sad

Mrs Wolfie · Mayor's Aide Joined: 16 Jun 2006 Posts: 117

The sad thing is, I can recall news footage of the streets of Palestine where women were dancing and doing the "trill call" over the tragedy here. It honestly makes you sick- there was no conspiracy. It was pure evil and hate stirred up by a man filled with pure hate and evil.

Dolly · Mayor Joined: 17 Jun 2006 Posts: 247

Well I was on the phone to my sister when the plane hit the second tower.
We were both hysterical.

First thing she said to me was "They are going to fall down, they can't do anything else."

I couldn't comprehend that they would, but she was right, and she ain't no engineer!

Thumperfive · Mayor Joined: 11 Jun 2006 Posts: 222

and that's the sad point - if you can't see how it would happen, then you've got more tin foil hats than the rest ofus!

Dolly · Mayor Joined: 17 Jun 2006 Posts: 247

The thing is the actual possibility seemed incomrehensible at the time.

Maybe some people still view it like that now.

The one thing that did surprise me is how they fell down. I expected them to go like a toppled tree but the way it happened did seem more like a controlled demolision.

But to a point I suppose it was like a controlled demolition - burning out from the inside.

Mrs Wolfie · Mayor's Aide Joined: 16 Jun 2006 Posts: 117

Dolly, there are several great documentaries that prove exactly what you just said. the structure burned from the inside down..

Dolly · Mayor Joined: 17 Jun 2006 Posts: 247

We used to have a guy on tv here in the UK, that was a demolition expert and steeplejack, but he was old school. The series of programmes ran for years, right up until his recent death.

Well he used to set fire to the large industrial chimneys in much the same way as the towers, and they came down the same way.

MHJ · Mayor's Aide Joined: 12 Jun 2006 Posts: 118

There is a really goofy conspiracy conference going on in LA this weekend. Some of tthe nuttier nuts have shown up

Dolly · Mayor Joined: 17 Jun 2006 Posts: 247

I've seen quite a few bits about it on the net, but just skirted them because even I think they are stretching it a bit far.

Now, if they do prove it was a conspiracy, you have it in writing that I was wrong Embarassed

Thumperfive · Mayor Joined: 11 Jun 2006 Posts: 222

it'd be great to say it's a conspiracy and prove it, because then we can just blame it on greed and not psychopathic religious killers...