Off Topic – Did this really happen?

[Anonymous]

Very nice calculations and comparisons, nsr; thanks!

[bgates]

Was the Pentagon’s outer wall reinforced like the concrete in the video?
No, I’m pretty sure the exterior of America’s military headquarters is mostly made of screen doors and French windows, in order to project an open and inviting image to the world. Why would a huge military installation want reinforced walls?

[Borat]

salo_t, nsr’s post above says it all. It is simple physics, F=mA. For A you have 500mph to 0 in a few milliseconds. That’s a big A. And we already know that m is very big — many, many tons. That means a really really really big F, as nsr has demonstrated. The reason the hole is smaller than the airplane is because aircraft are not solid objects, they are assemblies. The strongest parts (decks, bulkheads, etc…) are in the center and would penetrate more deeply. Also, the Pentagon is an office building, not a hardened bunker.

[PerryChase]

Regardless of whether you believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theory or not, it seems clear that the crashes have not been thoroughly investigated. The crash sites were promptly cleaned up to “get them behind us.”

We blamed Bin Ladin for the attacks but do we have 100% proof that he was directly linked? Or were the attackers only loosely related to Bin Ladin. If that was the case, killing Bin Ladin would not reduce future threats.

If a fervent worhipper committed murder or molested a child, are the Bishop and the whole congregation guilty because the perpetrator attended mass at that church everyday?

This tragedy needs to be investigated further. Like the supporters of the Patriot Act said “you don’t have anything to worry about if you didn’t do anything wrong.”

Maybe that’s why Ann Coulter was pissed at the 9/11 widows for demanding a better investigation.

[sdcellar]

Is it clear? It’s not to me, and the last thing I’m going to trust is a bunch of articles I find on the Internet. For every quality nugget, there’s also a pile of crap. The web has its place, but it’s not known for consistently reliable data.

On the second bit, are you saying we shouldn’t be concerned about Bin Ladin at all? Is he the Bishop in your example? I agree it’s tough to connect him directly to 9/11, but are you equating him to something good?

[PD]

I saw the Pentagon destruction only days later. I don’t have to rely on photos, which never match up to the real thing in scale. It was a mighty big hole, folks.

I like how all these conspiracy folks have no trouble believing that the government pulled an unimaginably huge hoax yet would release video of a cesna impacting the Pentagon. I think some people have been sniffing too much glue.

There have been instances where planes travelling at a high rate of speed pretty much disintegrated on impact.

Mountain crashes are not always straight on. The pilot may be pulling up or banking at impact. The crash site will look much different with larger pieces of the plane.

Perry, in your Bishop analogy you are comparing apples to oranges. If this Bishop is encouraging murder, etc, then he is just as guilty as the perpetrator.

[Anonymous]

Interesting off topic on the housing site. Don’t usually chime in here but couldn’t resist a few or more than few words. If we take step back here and look at the bigger picture, we know that the U.S. is currently the global superpower and as such, we are an imperialist nation looking to defend our super power status in the world, whether provoked or not. Our gov’t and military are always assessing and planning ahead to remain that way. I propose that 9/11 was just a part of a larger plan and was the fuel needed for the fire to rehsape the middle east. We may never know the real truth behind 9-11 but to dismiss it as being an unprovoked attack by islamic extremists is not looking at the big picture. Our government is probably one of the only organizations, coupled with other powerful govts, who could pull off such a feat as 9-11 on our soil. With our sophistication and military, the likelihood of some guy (binladen) living in a cave and orchestrating this whole thing with men with box cutters flying planes into buldings with no military resistance is far fetched. Plus all the other evidence or lack of evidence about the WTC’s way of collapsing has alreay been talked about extensively on this thread. I do think our gov’t has been planning this for some time now- those that are naive and think we just happen to walk into this should wake up. The Bush administration has been the one to implement this plan and as you have been seeing, they are executing it. I don’t think they expected the resistance and chaos they now have in Iraq, but expect an attack on Iran next year to neutralize their nuclear capacity. We have some forces in afghanistan and Iraq already, and the goal is for regime change in Iran. Bush has this goal and for better or for worse, he is on track to pull it off. The masses of people in the USA needed an emotional reason to support sending troops overseas, and 9/11 was that reason. Now, even as the public support has waned, it seems that both the dems and repubs are in not backing down on Iran. I don’t think we as the public will have a say right now. The troop levels will increase in Iraq as we prepare for Iran and Bush will want to finish this Mideast plan before leaving office. That is why we hear all the lies and coverups and why Bush will not listen to the majority of our people or the vast majority of european leaders- remember, it is all based on trying to remain THE superpower in the world- unfortunately, at some point, all empires will fall- only time will tell when our time is up. Just my two cents.

[jztz]

Conspiracy? or Searching for Truth?

Please read the following before you call those of us who question as having a taste for conspiracy.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquestion911commissionreport

The fact is, you can either see with your own eyes what doesn’t make sense (twin towers and WTC7’s implosions explained aways by merely airplane impact), or read about other people with credentials who have digged into deeper… now I’m hopeful that the truth will come out someday.

[powayseller]

jztz, interesting link.

Also check out the video Loose Change at http://www.loosechange911.com/

Just to clarify my personal position: I am not accusing anybody of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. I have no idea who was behind it.

I am merely questioning ONE part of the offical story because it doesn’t make sense.

How can the Twin Towers violate the law of inertia? They collapses at the speed of an object falling at free fall in a vacuum. I think some posters here must have a physics or engineering degree and can explain this for me.

Once you explain it, you can post it to all the 9/11 websites, and send it to NITSC for inclusion in their report, since they failed to address that at all. Just ignored that problem (like Thornburg ignoring exotic loans in his economic forecast).

In summary, anybody defending the offical story must be able to explain how the Twin Towers collapsed at the speed of freefall in a vacuum. Zero resistance from lower floors, as if they did not exist, and falling at a speed more akin to controlled demolition.

[powayseller]

jztz, interesting link. High ranking US government officials are criticizing the official report.

Also check out the video Loose Change at http://www.loosechange911.com/

Just to clarify my personal position: I am not accusing anybody of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. I have no idea who was behind it, what a motive would be, etc.

I am merely questioning ONE part of the offical story because it doesn’t make sense.

How can the Twin Towers violate the law of inertia? They collapses at the speed of an object falling at free fall in a vacuum. I think some posters here must have a physics or engineering degree and can explain this for me.

Once you explain it, you can post it to all the 9/11 websites, and send it to NITSC for inclusion in their report, since they failed to address that at all. Just ignored that problem (like Thornburg ignoring exotic loans in his economic forecast).

In summary, anybody defending the offical story must be able to explain how the Twin Towers collapsed at the speed of freefall in a vacuum. Zero resistance from lower floors, as if they did not exist, and falling at a speed more akin to controlled demolition.

[powayseller]

Paul Craig Roberts, PhD – Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury under Ronald Reagan. “Father of Reaganomics.” Former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. Currently Chairman of the Institute for Political Economy
and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute.

a.. Essay: “We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to ‘pancake’ at free fall speed. Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse
of the WTC buildings is false.” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/…

– from jztz’s link

Just to clarify my personal position: I am not accusing anybody of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. I have no idea who was behind it, what a motive would be, etc.

I am merely questioning ONE part of the offical story because it doesn’t make sense.

How can the Twin Towers violate the law of inertia? They collapses at the speed of an object falling at free fall in a vacuum. I think some posters here must have a physics or engineering degree and can explain this for me.

Once you explain it, you can post it to all the 9/11 websites, and send it to NITSC for inclusion in their report, since they failed to address that at all. Just ignored that problem (like Thornburg ignoring exotic loans in his economic forecast).

In summary, anybody defending the offical story must be able to explain how the Twin Towers collapsed at the speed of freefall in a vacuum. Zero resistance from lower floors, as if they did not exist, and falling at a speed more akin to controlled demolition.

[4plexowner]

WTC 7 also fell at free fall speed.

Common sense tells me that NO building can fall at free fall speed unless there is absolutely no resistance provided by the support structure (wood, steel or silly putty) for the building.

Explosive demolition of all the support structure DOES explain how the two towers and WTC 7 collapsed at free fall speed.

Related points that have not been explained:

> there was molten metal at ground zero days after the towers collapsed

> at least one of the pictures of ground zero show metal supports (huge I-beams) that have been severed diagonally – this is a standard part of controlled demolition which is accomplished using shaped thermite charges – the diagonal cuts cause the building being demolished to ‘walk’ off its supports – the supports at ground zero weren’t bent or torn which is what I would expect from a non-controlled collapse

[Anonymous]

ps, you have got to learn to spell ‘official.’

Maybe you have an inborn aversion to ‘official’ stories, resulting in a ‘learned’ aversion to properly spelling ‘official.’

[bgates]

I got distracted at jztz’s link. Do you want us to comment on 9-11, still? Or were you directing us to the CIA Mind Control articles? Or the UFO stuff? Because that site has it all.

Hey, I got it: maybe the CIA hypnotized the space aliens to make them zap the Pentagon from orbit.

[Author]

Posts