Off Topic – Did this really happen?

[powayseller]

My friend, who told me about this theory, easily refuts the NIST report as total bullshit. PD, get your head out of the sand and at least watch a video about 9/11 and then decide what you think happened. Total compliance to the government is unpatriotic. True patriots protect their country, think independently, and march against wrongs. Remember the Boston Tea Party? Does anyone in this country even have the guts anymore that the founders had, or are we turning into compliant followers? Our founders rebelled against their government. If they had not, we’d still be ruled by England. It’s sad that this courage has been dismissed as unpatriotic. Is it so hard to believe that the people who gave us the housing bubble and Iraq war are capable of cover-ups? Greenspan telling people in 2004 to get ARMs? That doesn’t sound like a benevolent government to me. So it’s natural, as I’m peeling back the layers of housing bubbles, to question what else they are up to.

Copied below is his e-mail response

The biggest weakness of the “buckling” theory is why the center column collapsed.

The center column was EXTREMELY strong – it was the main support structure of the buildings. You can read lots about this if you search Google. It was actually a very unique design – these center columns were STRONG.

If it is true that the trusses weakened due to heating, and buckled, OK, so the floor would detach from the center column and collapse down to the floor below it.

But why would the floors about it collapse????? They are still connected to the center support columns.

And even if they did somehow magically collapse AT THE EXACT SAME MOMENT as the floors below – WHY DID THE CENTER COLUMN COLLAPSE? I can see the floors collapsing around the center column, and the center column remaining standing at the end – which it easily could, it was extremely strong, basically all dense steel and concrete, holding up almost the entire weight of the buildings – but if you look at the final pictures, and those videos, there is NOTHING left of the center column at the end. Not even 10 feet sticking up above the ground.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CENTER COLUMN, NIST LIARS???

The NIST report does adequately refute some of the less sanguine “conspiracy theories”, but it doesn’t at all dispell the fundamental argument that it was a controlled demolition which the government – in this case, NIST – is covering up.

Just one example – FAQ 6. Of course the above floors were heavy enough to cause the lower floors to collapse – but they say the lower floors were so weak that they did not even slow down the upper floors (as if they were in free fall).

This ignores two fundamental principles of physics – the law of inertia and the law of energy conservation. When the buildings were collapsing, all of the concrete – of which there were endless tons, you can research if you like – was pulverized and turned into dust. This required a tremendous amount of energy. This energy had to come from the force of the building collapsing. Hence, some (a great deal) of that force was exhausted in crushing the cement and spewing it hundreds of years off to the side. Obviously this is not enough to stop the collapse – but independent investigators have confirmed it *is* enough to *slow* the collapse.

Second is the law of inertia. Each floor below (each of which was quite heavy) was at rest. The combined weight of the floors below, in fact, greatly exceeded the combined weight of the top floors. Each of these lower floors had to be started from a state of non-motion – i.e. the upper floors had to overcome the laws of inertia.

Again, this would not be enough force to stop the top floors from collapsing – but it would definitely *slow them down”.

As the report itself admits, both towers fell at the rate of free fall – if you dropped a bowling ball from the top of the building at the time the collapse started, it would have hit the ground at the exact same time as the top of the building.

Think about it. Would the bowling ball not have been slowed down, if at each step along the way, there was a suspended bowling ball it had to bring down with it (imagine the other balls were *barely* suspended, so that any amount of energy would break them.

Number 7. They say the steel trusses buckled due to insulation being blown off by the impact. This also is total bullshit.

Yes, steel softens when it reaches 1000 degrees. But in their own simulations, the buildings did not collapse under this scenario, until they “fudged” their simulation enough to force the collapse.

Second, there is no evidence the insulation was blown off, apart from their assertion, that I can find.

Third, it is true that hydrocarbons can burn at 1000 degrees but that is under optimal simulations – when there is enough oxygen (e.g., a blue flame on a stove, or a blast furnace, called blast b/c air is blasted onto the fire to keep the oxygen supply high). When there is a lot of smoke, it is obvious that the fire is oxygen starved and not burning nearly as hot.

In the WTCs, the fuel would have burned away in a few minutes. The second building impacted (which collapsed first) is the best example – almost all the fuel was burned off outside the building right after impact. Aside from that Kerosene evaporates quickly at room temperature. You can do your own experiment – spill a gallon of kerosene on the ground, light it, and see how long it burns. Maybe a few minutes, that’s it.

But the buildings collapsed over an hour after impact. If the steel beams somehow (impossibly) did get really hot from the kerosene, they would have cooled by then.

If you look at pictures of the buildings, there was hardly any fires – small, isolated ones. Compare these fire pictures of the WTC w/ the Spanish Windsor building fire that burned several years later, but did not collapse:

WTC fires: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/fires/severity.html
Other buildings: http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html

Look at these pictures and tell me, which fire was high and hot enough, to heat steel to 1000 degrees.

Finally, steel has a remarkable ability to transfer heat. E.g., if you heat one part of steel, the heat travels down the steel quickly. That is why when people forge (unhardened) steel, they use tongs to grab the steel. The WTCs had countless tons of steel, all connected. Any heat being applied to the steel beams, would have been transferred through the building quickly.

In terms of all those scientists – keep in mind the problem of “group think”. They are all told this is how the building collapsed, now substantiate it. Everyone knows that to question it, is to accuse their government of complicity in the crime. Who will do that? How do we know they didn’t try, and were threatened one way or another? How were these scientists selected – b/c they tend to “go with the flow” or for their renowned critical analysis and whistleblowing? Did they have to sign confidentiality papers? Why have none of these scientists publish independent reports?

Why did the lead demolition expert in the US, when he saw the buildings collapse, exclaim it was a controlled demolition, only to retract his story days later after the CIA visited him? Was he told this is a question of national security?

BTW – here is a thesis of how the gov’t managed to shut these scientists up. (And this is the backup story if the demolition theory is finally validated in the public arena, which it eventually will be.) They will claim: they were afraid the building would collapse. If it did, it would not collapse straight down, and knock nearby buildings over. These buildings were still filled with people. Therefor, they had to bring the WTCs down to save the neighboring buildings. They cannot say this publicly b/c people would not understand, people are emotional – but we are the gov’t, we were acting to protect people. That is the backup lie.

BTW, one of these links has a nice picture of the Windsor building burning (it burned for almost 2 days) in Spain in 2005 or so – the building did not collapse despite the obviously much greater fire (in contrast the WTC fires were minor, you can see people standing in the hole where the airplane entered, firefighters were saying there were only “isolated pockets” of fire, and there was only thick black smoke coming from the building, up until it collapsed):
[img_assist|nid=2262|title=Windsor building, Spain, Building did not collapse|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=345|height=500]

This building has a similar design to the WTC, but despite the much greater fire, did not collapse.

So there are so many unanswered questions, that I am really unsure what happened.

4plexowner really nailed it: why were the remains of the building not studied, and so quickly hustled off to recyclers? Why was Osama bin Laden immediately named as a suspect, without any investigation? Those 2 questions make me suspect of the official government version. Why no whistleblowers? Well, why didn’t the cigarette companies or Enron have whistleblowers? For decades, we were told cigarettes are safe, even though hundreds or thousands of insiders knew otherwise.

[salo_t]

powayseller that was well written and you made some great points. To me whats even scarier than the current administration are the sheep like people that try to protect them. I’m not anti government by any means but I’m smart enough to know that given human nature people (government) can and will be persuaded by greed and good folks will pay the price because of it. Standing up against wrong doing is VERY American.

[bgates]

How many of you conspiracy nuts think the government was responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing? Or the Khobar Towers bombing? Or the first World Trade Center bombing? Or the 1998 embassy bombings? Or the 2000 USS Cole bombing? Or the Olympic bombing?

And if you really think the government has murdered thousands of people, and you do nothing about it besides write comments to a website, how do you live with your cowardice?

[powayseller]

bgates, you raise an excellent point. Do you really think the government is behind every single crime? That’s taking it a little far, is it not? Still, I’m not convinced the government did this. And if they did, then *who*, and what would be a patriotic action? Perhaps educating others is a first step.

PD, this quote from President Roosevelt is for you, defining patriotism. I think many Americans have confused loyalty to elected officials as patriotism. It is like the church goer who thinks that being godly means being passive and a doormat, never making waves. Jesus made lots of waves, and our founding fathers were courageous and rebellious. They would never had defended an unjust war, never.

“Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or anyone else” –

Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President of the United States

[PerryChase]

I’m amazed that some many of you believe in conspiracy theories. I believe this government (Bush Administration) is self-serving but I don’t think that they had the foresight or the smarts to pull-off 9/11. Heck, they can’t even manage Iraq.

The government reacted to 9/11 and used it for its purposes but pulling-off such a secret operation is beyond the imagination.

[Anonymous]

Hey, ps, just because someone doesn't buy your line of argument doesn't mean they've got their head in the sand.

Heck, tell your husband to get his head out of the sand to buy more than a token sum of gold.

Better links to terrorists and American flight 587:

http://www.rockawave.com/News/2004/0924/Front_Page/129.html

http://www.rockawave.com/news/2004/0903/Front_Page/033.html

http://www.newsmax.com/archive/print.pl?a=2001/12/22/214320

Unfortunately, I can't find it, but shortly after 587, followed shortly by Richard Reid's aborted attempt to bomb a flight, I read an article hypothesizing how a shoebomber sitting near the wing or tail (I forget which), after having assembled the bomb in the restroom, could have downed 587.  Scary, and it's the reason why we have to take off our shoes when going through screening.

[bgates]

Perry, somebody hijacked your login.

Was it the guy yesterday who said, “Interesting topic. I haven’t read much about how the towers came down. I’ll check into the info you guys mentioned.”

Or the guy today who said, “I’m amazed that some many of you believe in conspiracy theories.”

[powayseller]

Head in the sand refers to anyone dismissing an idea without studying it first. PD did not address any of the questions; she simply said it could never have happened. Head in the sand.

Explain how the center columns could collapse, and why the fire in the photo above, which was much stronger and longer lasting than the WTC fires, did not destroy that building.

It worries me that patriotism is being replaced by idolatry of elected officials.

[bgates]

PS, I have the idea that you brother is part of a terrorist cell, and he’s using you to poke around online for gullible America-haters to help him kill Jews.

As evidence, I will note that you post a lot of material on this site, a lot of it is very critical of the US and Israel, you’ve said admiring things about Iran’s president, you’re from a part of the world where people have chanted ‘Death to America’ for decades, and you apparently got this thread started picking up a link from an anti-Semitic website.

Now, will you calmly present evidence that I am mistaken, or will you simply say that could never happen?

Or maybe you’re trying to drum up money for terrorist groups. If someone wanted to get money from Americans for terrorism, I think they would have to:
-find Americans who had lots of money, maybe because they had recently been convinced to sell their houses
-convince those people that many other investments were risky, by talking up the possibility of a depression or by very publically making some investments that don’t pan out to convince the marks of the risks of the market
-be endlessly critical of the American government and speak admiringly of its enemies, like the president of Iran

Gee, ps, it looks like your work on this site matches up with what a terrorist fund-raiser would do. Do you want to deny it – careful, that’s just what a guilty person would do. Do you want to ignore the accusation as batshit crazy – careful, that’s the other thing a guilty person would do.

It just so happens that denying or ignoring ludicrous charges are also what an innocent person would do. But don’t anybody try telling me that, or I’ll call you mindless idolaters and sheep!

[PerryChase]

bgates, nobody hijacked my login. I was too busy and respond before; and I really had no clue about the details of how the WTC towers came down. I had fun reading about the conspiracy theories. I’m truely amazed that so many believe in them.

I don’t dispute that governments do sometimes conspire but it hardly ever works because of the law of unintended consequences. If the US government could conspire and manage foreign policy successfully then everything would go our way — but they don’t.

Government institutions are built over decades and there’s no way that GWB could waltz in and pull this off.

[CardiffBaseball]

And here I thought Bush was an idiot, the stupidest President we’ve ever had. Turns out he is one of the most brilliant, conniving minds in the history of the world. To get all these people to act in concert and getting them to keep it secret all these years is a brilliant stroke. I am guessing every member of this secret cabal, down to the blue collar members who had a hand in this too, are millionaires several time over and only continue working, so as not to draw suspicion.

The lowest member of the society must be compensated highly, if for no other reason that they don’t want them pitching a new book to Judith Regan.

[Anonymous]

You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.

People leaving the towers after the 1st plane hit were told it was safe and to go back to work. But at the same time, WTC7 was being evacuated. Hmmm … then at 5:20 in the afternoon, they “pulled” WTC7.

In the days leading up to 9-11, it’s common knowledge that massive shorting of airline stocks was going on. We’ve all read about it in the mainstream media.

If Bush was so intent on finding the perpetrators of 9-11, (i.e. Bin Laden) then why didn’t the FBI find those people who were making millions in the stock market off this disaster. Every plane in the U.S. was grounded after the attacks, but Bin Ladens family members were spirited away to safety via private jets.

There’s so much bullshit piled up … it stinks to high heaven.

We’ve spent 350 billion running around Iraq killing innocent women and children.

Saddam Hussein killed appoximately 500,000 Iraqis during his 25 years in power.

The U.S. has managed to kill 655,000 in less than 3 years. Those numbers are mostly civilians. From the Lancet 2006 study, “Most individuals reported killed by coalition forces were women and children.”

All of this “War on Terror” has been done in the name of 9-11.

And the events and evidence discussed on this board should be enough to make anyone just a little curious as to what the hell is going on. I believe the old saying, “The fish stinks from the head down”. So if the whole 9-11 event stinks, I say lets start asking those in charge the hard questions. That’s what this is all about.

[powayseller]

bgates, I got the idea for this thread from this real estate website . Scroll down, and look at the left column. That’s where the WTC stuff is posted.

To be honest, I was hoping some of the smart people here could explain away all the problems with the offical story.

[Anonymous]

“Bin-Ladin Denies Involvement in the 9/11 Attacks”

This is an interview of Osama that I found dated 28 of September 2001. This adds more fuel to the conspiracy fire.

http://www.911review.com/articles/usamah/khilafah.html

Osama:

“I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel. There is also a warning for those Muslim countries, which witnessed all these as a silent spectator. What had earlier been done to the innocent people of Iraq, Chechnya and Bosnia? Only one conclusion could be derived from the indifference of the United States and the West to these acts of terror and the patronage of the tyrants by these powers that America is an anti-Islamic power and it is patronizing the anti-Islamic forces. Its friendship with the Muslim countries is just a show, rather deceit. By enticing or intimidating these countries, the United States is forcing them to play a role of its choice. Put a glance all around and you will see that the slaves of the United States are either rulers or enemies of Muslims.”

[Anonymous]

Fake Bin-Laden 9/11 Confession Video

This has been confirmed as a fake:

http://911lies.org/fake_bin_laden.html

[Author]

Posts