poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
i like that
i like that
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/ny … es_01.html
"WTC Building 7 appears to have suffered significant damage at some point after the WTC Towers had collapsed, according to firefighters at the scene. Firefighter Butch Brandies tells other firefighters that nobody is to go into Building 7 because of creaking and noises coming out of there. [Firehouse Magazine, 8/02]
According to Deputy Chief Peter Hayden, there is a bulge in the southwest corner of the building between floors 10 and 13. [Firehouse Magazine, 4/02]
Battalion Chief John Norman later recalls, “At the edge of the south face you could see that it is very heavily damaged.” [Firehouse Magazine, 5/02]
Deputy Chief Nick Visconti also later recalls recounts, “A big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side.” Captain Chris Boyle recalls, “On the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors.” [Firehouse Magazine, 8/02]
"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...igro_Daniel.txt
"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...ski_Richard.txt
"Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area -- (Q. A collapse zone?) -- Yeah -- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed." - Chief Cruthers
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...IC/Cruthers.txt
"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o'clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.... The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn't] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that's] when 7 collapsed.... Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess." - William Ryan
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...yan_William.txt
"WTC Building 7 appears to have suffered significant damage at some point after the WTC Towers had collapsed, according to firefighters at the scene. Firefighter Butch Brandies tells other firefighters that nobody is to go into Building 7 because of creaking and noises coming out of there. [Firehouse Magazine, 8/02]
According to Deputy Chief Peter Hayden, there is a bulge in the southwest corner of the building between floors 10 and 13. [Firehouse Magazine, 4/02]
Battalion Chief John Norman later recalls, “At the edge of the south face you could see that it is very heavily damaged.” [Firehouse Magazine, 5/02]
Deputy Chief Nick Visconti also later recalls recounts, “A big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side.” Captain Chris Boyle recalls, “On the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors.” [Firehouse Magazine, 8/02]
"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...igro_Daniel.txt
"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...ski_Richard.txt
"Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area -- (Q. A collapse zone?) -- Yeah -- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed." - Chief Cruthers
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...IC/Cruthers.txt
"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o'clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.... The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn't] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that's] when 7 collapsed.... Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess." - William Ryan
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...yan_William.txt
Xbone Stormsurgezz
For those too lazy to click my link...
Popular Mechanics Cover Story 2005 wrote:
"Melted" Steel
CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."
"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.
"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."
Puffs Of Dust
CLAIM: As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions." Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." The article continues, "Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures."
FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.
Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air--along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse--was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."
Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."
Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol … tml?page=4
Myth about myth yields nothing practical...Darth_Fleder wrote:
Debunking the 9/11 MythsP.T. Barnum wrote:
There's a sucker born every minute.
If there was even a whiff of truth that the administration was even remotely involved in plotting 9/11, don't you think that the Dems and the media would be screaming it from the rooftops.
The only other way to explain their silence is if the Dems were also involved in the planning and execution. In which case you liberals are still on the wrong side.
Nothing is debunked... of conspiracy theories - there are 2... thus sayeth Yoda.
1.) The Wacko official conspiracy theory.
2.) The Wacko internet theories.
Debunking the debunking...
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/ … hanics.htm
Last edited by topal63 (2006-10-04 12:05:28)
Let me start by offering clarity to my stance. I am a Republican, not to be mistaken for a Bush supporter. For the record we did find the WMD's several months after the infiltration of Iraq. If you remember correctly they were found in an attempt to be smuggled out of the country and in to Syria. Don't ask for a link from me, look it up yourself. I do not dislike Democrats , however, I despise liberals. And you have to admit, whether you like it or not, a large portion of the American media is VERY liberal. They report things that help their agenda and use them as a catalyst against conservitive America. If it were up to me, and its not, I would pull the U.S. out of Iraq. I served in the Marines myself and I am not suggesting we ought to be over there in Iraq but these terrorists need to be hunted with extreme prejeduce and dealt with. In summary, I have no conspiracy theory because nobody really knows the truth but I do know many Americans make me sick with their anti- patriotic antics.superfly_cox wrote:
Answer me this one simple question and it will all become very clear for me. If the US government was so clever, so devious, so well organized, and so determined as to commit the events of 9/11 themselves then how is it that the same government/forces (that be) were not able to "find" Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? Would it have been so difficult to stage a mock discovery of WMD's considering they controlled Iraq and had just publicly staged the most elaborate hoax (9/11) in the history of man kind? Would have been peanuts in comparision...
For you conspiracy theorists, if you want to take a shot at this question use some intelligence and don't offer silly reasons like "to throw off people about 9/11". You've already given the US Government alot of credit (for competence) with all the 9/11 conspiracy theories! So why couldn't they produce some WMD's to get the entire world off of their case?
Malloy must go
^^^Thank god for us realists. CTs should be beaten with a bamboo stick...
Please pat yourself on the back again...Jenkinsbball wrote:
^^^Thank god for us realists. CTs should be beaten with a bamboo stick...
And when you masterbate do you fantasize about yourself... or do you masterbate in front of a mirror?
Your word choice seems inappropriate - “theory” would be the correct word choice as opposed to "conspiracy"Kmarion wrote:
You seem a little too curios. Perhaps you are developing another conspiracy.topal63 wrote:
.. or do you masterbate in front of a mirror?
. . . and in answer to your question. YES! That’s my figurative “theory” about the lot that pat themself on the back for thinking a great big nothing.
Last edited by topal63 (2006-10-04 12:22:26)
You seem a little too curios. Perhaps you are developing another conspiracy.topal63 wrote:
.. or do you masterbate in front of a mirror?
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-10-04 11:32:36)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Yep Yep Yep. GG on Popular Mechanics on debunking "claims" that no one but the magazine and people who believe the "official" version propagate.topal63 wrote:
Myth about myth yields nothing practical...Darth_Fleder wrote:
Debunking the 9/11 MythsP.T. Barnum wrote:
There's a sucker born every minute.
If there was even a whiff of truth that the administration was even remotely involved in plotting 9/11, don't you think that the Dems and the media would be screaming it from the rooftops.
The only other way to explain their silence is if the Dems were also involved in the planning and execution. In which case you liberals are still on the wrong side.
Nothing is debunked... of conspiracy theories - there are 2... thus sayeth Yoda.
1.) The Wacko official conspiracy theory.
2.) The Wacko internet theroies.
Debunking the debunking...
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/ … hanics.htm
Also, GG on Darth-Fleder for showing his ignorance in lumping the Dems and Media together with liberal-minded people. Because clearly if you think liberally you must be a Democrat. Sheesh.
Please tell me why you think the media is liberal-biased. If the media was liberally biased, the fact that Osama has not been caught despite being our "number one priority", thousands of our brothers and sisters are dying in Iraq for nothing, Cheney and Co. lied and committed treason to the American public, the Bush Administration had secret meetings with Enron and other energy executives directly prior to the collapse of Enron, flights out of the U.S. directly succeeding the 9/11 attacks flew out high-importance Saudi officials and Bin-Laden relatives, genocide is occurring in Darfur, Israelis are killing civilians and occupying the West Bank and Gaza Strip, etc etc etc would be mainstream news. Instead we get random acts of violence, discussion over Gay Marriage Amendments, Sex scandals, missing persons, Terry Schaivo, Natalee Halloway, human-interest stories etc etc etc.
The media is not liberally biased. The MSM tries to sell, to make money. They are biased toward big-business and self-reliance.
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-10-04 11:48:02)
Ahh, yes...I am the ignorant one here. The mighty KEN-JENNINGS has seen fit to set me straight with his tremendous intellect and many years of experience on this Earth! Now that I have seen the light, I will begin offering a complete line of books on the subject and will offering them a greatly reduced prices--only 90% over newsstand prices.
KEN, I have just written a paper '9/11 and the WTC: An insider's perspective' that I will offer to you and your fellow conspiricists at a special pre-release price of $19.95 $29.95. It offers incontrovertible evidence of how the military used Elvis and specially trained sewer rats to plant the charges that brought down the WTC. You will be able to humble any opposition to your views armed with this new evidence. PM me and I will give you my paypal address and I will promptly mail you a copy!
topal63, that serendipity site that you sent me to has links on it that tried to hijack my browser.
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net … 911_morons
KEN, I have just written a paper '9/11 and the WTC: An insider's perspective' that I will offer to you and your fellow conspiricists at a special pre-release price of $19.95 $29.95. It offers incontrovertible evidence of how the military used Elvis and specially trained sewer rats to plant the charges that brought down the WTC. You will be able to humble any opposition to your views armed with this new evidence. PM me and I will give you my paypal address and I will promptly mail you a copy!
topal63, that serendipity site that you sent me to has links on it that tried to hijack my browser.
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net … 911_morons
Just letting you know that saying some one is liberal and assuming they must be a Democrat is ignorant.Darth_Fleder wrote:
Ahh, yes...I am the ignorant one here. The mighty KEN-JENNINGS has seen fit to set me straight with his tremendous intellect and many years of experience on this Earth! Now that I have seen the light, I will begin offering a complete line of books on the subject and will offering them a greatly reduced prices--only 90% over newsstand prices.
KEN, I have just written a paper '9/11 and the WTC: An insider's perspective' that I will offer to you and your fellow conspiricists at a special pre-release price of $19.95 $29.95. It offers incontrovertible evidence of how the military used Elvis and specially trained sewer rats to plant the charges that brought down the WTC. You will be able to humble any opposition to your views armed with this new evidence. PM me and I will give you my paypal address and I will promptly mail you a copy!
topal63, that serendipity site that you sent me to has links on it that tried to hijack my browser.
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net … 911_morons
I just ask why you blindly believe the government version of the events, not necessarily the actual events. Maybe do your own research, which clearly you haven't. Good job on trying to put me down though. I applaud you for your description of me as "Mighty Ken-Jennings". See, this is what people do when they can't offer any sound, reasonable arguments: They resort to put-downs and name calling. I thought you were too mature for that Darth
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-10-04 13:03:07)
Are you BS-ing me? You must be - you know IT TO BE TRUE - SEARCH YOUR FEELINGS FLEDER!Darth_Fleder wrote:
. . . topal63, that serendipity site that you sent me to has links on it that tried to hijack my browser.
"Hijack" your browser? You'll need to provide proof - proof of course that I will debunk... this "hijack" conspiracy theory of yours, at this point, is proofless.
And thence you can debunk my debunking... and then I can do the same.
Last edited by topal63 (2006-10-04 13:08:17)
Did the links try to fly your browser into buildings?Darth_Fleder wrote:
topal63, that serendipity site that you sent me to has links on it that tried to hijack my browser.
Let's see KEN, resorting to put downs and name calling...hmmmm...KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I just ask why you blindly believe the government version of the events, not necessarily the actual events. Maybe do your own research, which clearly you haven't. Good job on trying to put me down though. I applaud you for your description of me as "Mighty Ken-Jennings". See, this is what people do when they can't offer any sound, reasonable arguments: They resort to put-downs and name calling. I thought you were too mature for that Darth
Clearly you are an expert on this topic, KEN.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
...Also, GG on Darth-Fleder for showing his ignorance...
As to believing what you call 'The Government Version', forgive me by being deluded by EYEWITNESS reports...not to mention Occam's razor. Let's see...massive secret conspiracy involving all branches of government and the military (potentially thousands of individuals where no one has become pissed off enough to come forward) vs 19 hijackers complete with reliable eyewitness accounts, cockpit recordings etc... pardon my simplicity...but I went with the hijackers.
As I said before KEN, I have since recanted my former views...I also have just completed a paper "Liberal Media Bias:Pure Science Fiction!" where I give concrete proof that aliens from our hidden sister planet on the opposite side of the sun are controlling and distorting the minds of easily duped people into believing that there is a liberal bias in the media when actually the reverse is true. They also have a connection to the events of 9/11. This is a must have for you KEN, you will be unstoppable in defeating those wascally wepublicans...again only $19.95 $29.95!
ROFL!jonsimon wrote:
Did the links try to fly your browser into buildings?Darth_Fleder wrote:
topal63, that serendipity site that you sent me to has links on it that tried to hijack my browser.
I would never try to BS such an expert BSer as yourself topal.topal63 wrote:
Are you BS-ing me? .
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_p … esses.html
No, his DEll used controlled demolitions.jonsimon wrote:
Did the links try to fly your browser into buildings?Darth_Fleder wrote:
topal63, that serendipity site that you sent me to has links on it that tried to hijack my browser.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Actually, I read a news article somewhere that said there WERE WMD's. Just prior to our invading Iraq Sadaam supposedly had them shipped to Syria.superfly_cox wrote:
Answer me this one simple question and it will all become very clear for me. If the US government was so clever, so devious, so well organized, and so determined as to commit the events of 9/11 themselves then how is it that the same government/forces (that be) were not able to "find" Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? Would it have been so difficult to stage a mock discovery of WMD's considering they controlled Iraq and had just publicly staged the most elaborate hoax (9/11) in the history of man kind? Would have been peanuts in comparision...
For you conspiracy theorists, if you want to take a shot at this question use some intelligence and don't offer silly reasons like "to throw off people about 9/11". You've already given the US Government alot of credit (for competence) with all the 9/11 conspiracy theories! So why couldn't they produce some WMD's to get the entire world off of their case?
Wish I could remember which news organization that was...
Occam's razor states that: "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity." If your theory provides for contradiction of physical laws, then your theory has been multiplied beyond necessity and it is implied your theory is inferior to those that do not assume contradiction of physical laws.Darth_Fleder wrote:
As to believing what you call 'The Government Version', forgive me by being deluded by EYEWITNESS reports...not to mention Occam's razor. Let's see...massive secret conspiracy involving all branches of government and the military (potentially thousands of individuals where no one has become pissed off enough to come forward) vs 19 hijackers complete with reliable eyewitness accounts, cockpit recordings etc... pardon my simplicity...but I went with the hijackers.
Because you cannot prove your theory does not provide for the contradiction of physical laws, (ex. the impossible turn executed when hitting the pentagon, the hole in the pentagon, the explosions in the towers, and the collapse of the towers, all of which are topics of debate) and because my theory does not provide for contradiction of physical laws in any way (instead assuming organized person(s) otherwise created the aforementioned phenomenon), my theory is not multiplied beyond any necessity (necessity being that of witholding all physical laws) and is, by Occam's razor, implied superior.
Actually YES, you should... before you post.mattajohnstone wrote:
anyone seen this http://www.freedomunderground.org/memor … n.php#Main
sorry if its been posted b4 cant be asked to look through 9 pages...
9 pages, that's like 2 minutes per page max... 12-18 measly minutes max.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/2257
Interview on this page:
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Fetzer06.html
Thu., August 24, 2006: Playlists: M3U | RAM (Individual MP3s: Hr1 Hr2 )
1st hour Guest: David Ray Griffin
2nd hour Guest: Charles N. Pegelow
Download "Hr2". . . if you're interested in a Structaral Engineers opinion rather than the opine of "those" who like to pat themselves on the back for no-reason.
Last edited by topal63 (2006-10-04 14:41:48)
anyone seen this http://www.freedomunderground.org/memor … n.php#Main
sorry if its been posted b4 cant be asked to look through 9 pages...
sorry if its been posted b4 cant be asked to look through 9 pages...
I call it like I see it...You made an ignorant comment, and I called you on it. You, on the other hand, dismiss what I say for whatever reason and try to demean me. Don't make ignorant comments, Darth, and I won't call you ignorant.Darth_Fleder wrote:
Let's see KEN, resorting to put downs and name calling...hmmmm...KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
...Also, GG on Darth-Fleder for showing his ignorance...
I don't doubt planes flew into the towers, the towers collapsed, people died.Darth_Fleder wrote:
As to believing what you call 'The Government Version', forgive me by being deluded by EYEWITNESS reports...not to mention Occam's razor. Let's see...massive secret conspiracy involving all branches of government and the military (potentially thousands of individuals where no one has become pissed off enough to come forward) vs 19 hijackers complete with reliable eyewitness accounts, cockpit recordings etc... pardon my simplicity...but I went with the hijackers.
I don't know about the so-called 19 hijackers, because there has been no defining evidence on them. If there were these hijackers, there has been no proof either way that the US government was not involved.
People seeing Arab passengers board a flight, take flight training and such is not enough for me. I can guarantee you that there are Arab pilots, both before and after 9/11. Clearly they must have went to school somewhere. I'll tell you what- I am flying to Las Vegas on Friday, I'll let you know if any Arabs board so we can get them off before they hijack the plane.
Darth, you just lost a good amount of respect from me. Throughout the debate forum we have disagreed and debated (and argued) about plenty of things without the banter seen here. You disagree with my opinions, which is fine, but to try to degrade me and my opinions by attempting humor is disrespectful. As far as I am concerned, you are just another close-minded human too stupid to change a system that takes advantage of you.
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-10-04 14:08:53)
The states should take a leaf out of the UK's book, we don't let Muslim pilots fly our planes anymore. http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_b … 220859.eceKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
People seeing Arab passengers board a flight, take flight training and such is not enough for me. I can guarantee you that there are Arab pilots, both before and after 9/11. Clearly they must have went to school somewhere. I'll tell you what- I am flying to Las Vegas on Friday, I'll let you know if any Arabs board so we can get them off before they hijack the plane.
And if you spot some on your flight don't just say 'I think they might be Arab', that might not work. Just say you heard them praying, and you are sure it's because they are going to detonate a bomb: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/5267884.stm
Structural info. "again!"... regarding the Leslie Robertson WTC design...
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
Interview with an editor of "Popular Mechanics" about the myth of 9/11 myth debunking.
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/ … -am-c3.MP3
“If there is evidence - why is it being withheld from the American Public.”
It gets funny near the end about “DNA” - IMO.
Make up your own mind - about myth & the myth of debunking - if you have one.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html
Interview with an editor of "Popular Mechanics" about the myth of 9/11 myth debunking.
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/ … -am-c3.MP3
“If there is evidence - why is it being withheld from the American Public.”
It gets funny near the end about “DNA” - IMO.
Make up your own mind - about myth & the myth of debunking - if you have one.
Last edited by topal63 (2006-10-04 16:45:28)