[quote=“FuzzyFish,post:14,topic:32860"”]
What are you talking about it clearly points out the connection with the steel used in the WTC, and the steel used on that bridge were both designed to melt well below specification. This empathizes that our steel industry is undermined by terrorists!
[/quote]
That explains the terrorist ring in Lackawanna. They were strategically left there after they shut the plant down 25 years ago. It was all part of the plan…
Damn right it was, I’m totally writing a blog about it tonight. As soon as I give a shit.
The answers are there if you try to look into it even slightly. However you seem to be immune to that. It’s not like the building is going to topple over like a tree, there is just too much mass.
[quote=“97_B18b1,post:20,topic:32860"”]
Claimed radio transmission. I heard it when i was watching the video with the 2 french filmakers doing a documentary on the fdny and 9/11 happened during the documentary, and they showed that scene during loose change. They showed the chief saying it and they played the audio as well. Pretty compelling in my opinion. And about the fuel, you dont need to be a genius to realize that most of both the planes jet fuel exploded outside the buildings in a fireball. How the hell do 2 110 story buildings that are buring for less than an hour and a little more than an hour collapse on top of themselves in what most eyewitness said looked like a planned implosion. I just want answers. If someone answers these questions then i will shut up.
[/quote]
:mamoru: Wow. Yep, you’re right. If only there was a rational explanation for buildings that got hit with jet liners full of fuel collapsing. Until we can find a more reasonable explanation, the most likely cause is the evil elected government of our democracy secretly planting explosives and killing thousands of people to instill fear in us and keep us under control. All without a single person involved blowing the cover.
If only there was a more rational reason. Burning buildings, especially ones with jet fuel burning in them, don’t just collapse.
The steel doesn’t have to melt to collapse the building. It just had to get hot enough to be unstable, not become liquid!
Just look at sites that debunk loose change and you’ll see just how silly it is. The main source is a con artist!
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html
go especially to this part on the second page: "When you rely on someone as a spokesman for your cause or as an expert in a certain field, you should check their credentials to be sure they’re legit. If you mention the businesses they are involved in as evidence of their expertise, you should check those also. I’m not saying that Karl W.B. Schwarz a liar and a con-man. Okay, I am absolutely saying that. But I encourage you to examine the evidence and make up your own mind.
Karl’s name comes up a lot on the internet. He seems to spend a lot of time defending his good name against people who accuse him of being…difficult. I can say a few things for sure about Karl W.B. Schwarz, because they’re a matter of public record."
And keep reading from there.
Ita never happened before!!! The empire state building was hit by a bomber in the 1940’s I did the reserach. The steel used in the empire state building had the exact same specs as the steel in the WTC. It is also concrete reinforced and it burnt for almost 4 hours and did not collapse. And one of the planes that hit the WTC hit it very close to the top where there is the least amount of mass. Theres just not enough weight up there for it to collapse theres too much structure below holding it up.
You do realize bombers from the 1940s are quite a bit different in that.
A. They used a lot of wood, and aluminium construction.
B. Could not fly nearly as fast as a modern jetliner.
C. It was quite a damn bit smaller
D. It was not being flown anywere near it’s maximum speed.
E. It hit near the top, there is no where near the mass supported by the builiding structure itself.
Where did You get your doctorate in engineering 97 B18b1?
[quote=“Nikuk,post:27,topic:32860"”]
Where did You get your doctorate in engineering 97 B18b1?
[/quote]
el oh el!
Listen 97 B18b1, I am very active in the peace movement and locally, the WNY Peace Center. I’m actually hosting a film screening tonight at Hallwalls where we are going to screen Why We Fight.
I am adamantly against the Bush administration and the war. But I am not stupid enough to believe that 9/11 was orchestrated by the government, and that they killed thousands of Americans to cause a war. I know a lot of peace activists and very few of them believe that this BS is credible.
Vote for ban.
We have more than enough stupid here already.
[quote=“JayS,post:29,topic:32860"”]
Vote for ban.
We have more than enough stupid here already.
[/quote]
Stay on topic Jay.
We’re talking about the Cheney’s evil 9/11 plot, not Bushy’s illegal immigration plans.
+1 for ban
E. It hit near the top, there is no where near the mass supported by the builiding structure itself.
Just like one of the planes that hit the, o god nvm im done argueing, im done.
[quote=“97_B18b1,post:32,topic:32860"”]
Just like one of the planes that hit the, o god nvm im done argueing, im done.
[/quote]
please, remember that feeling whenever you have the urge to click that pretty “NEW THREAD” button
Hahahahaha. Oh dear time for MSpaint diagram time.
Last I checked it didn’t hit anywhere near the top 10 floors. See also point A through D.
[quote=“JayS,post:29,topic:32860"”]
Vote for ban.
We have more than enough stupid here already.
[/quote]
lol since when is the ability to think a requirement for an internet forum? Apparently all that’s necessary is a keyboard and an appendage with which to mash it.
[quote=“97_B18b1,post:32,topic:32860"”]
E. It hit near the top, there is no where near the mass supported by the builiding structure itself.
Just like one of the planes that hit the, o god nvm im done argueing, im done.
[/quote]
:mamoru: It’s hard to maintain this argument around reasonably intelligent people who can think objectively isn’t it?
[quote=“BikerFry,post:36,topic:32860"”]
:mamoru: It’s hard to maintain this argument around reasonably intelligent people who can think objectively isn’t it?
[/quote]
The scary thing is these people get to vote.
No its hard to maintain an argument around people who keep saying the same thing over and over again so im gonna stop going in circles
Edit----> I dont vote becuase my one vote does absolutly nothing, and neone who argues that is a straight up retard
The original loose change is pretty sketchy.
fortunately they revised it to exclude the majority of that missiles mumbo-jumbo.
In my opinion it requires a third major edit, not to necessarily exclude anything in particular, but to focus less on the temperature at which steel melts and and focus more on the fact that a third tower fell.
In the course of your daily lives, in conversation with somewhat intelligent people, ask them if they knew that WTC 7 fell on that same day depsite not being hit by a plane and not being destroyed by falling debris. In fact it was still standing after the twins fell.
That is the single most unbelievable component of the day for me.
That and the documents generated by Wolfivitz, Rumsfeld, et al about the need for a significant event to occur to justify the reassertion of US military clout and the suggestion that if no such event occured it may very well have to be staged.
These documents are mentioned very briefly in LC2 but not nearly as much as they could have considering all of the information available about them.
There was a CBC documentary 2-3 years ago on the subject of those reports and it was over an hour long with interviews of current and former US administration who had read the documents.
I dont really give a shit what happened on that day, but if you honestly think that it was just an act of terrorism on behalf of Al Qeada then i guess you deserved it.
There is a variety of information and excellent documentaries that pre-date the day in question that create the appropirate context for how this type of event is create, used and preserved. All of which have been the case with 9/11. It’s basically a tool, in much the same way Super Tuner and the Transformers movie is.
Or maybe there was a huge 30 page spread on US military personnel and their awesome cars just because it was a neat idea and it had nothing to do with the fact that subconsciously you’re supposed to realise that you dont have an awesome skyline because you are’nt in the military and that if you sold out you might have an awesome skyline and skylines are awesome and super tuner is awesome and transformers are awesome and the military is awesome and 9/11 is awesome and life is awesome cause america is awesome and awesome is awesome which is totally awesome.
and basically none of it really matters if you just argue and bicker about it.
but yeah, there is some important information in loose change but the first version sucks, the second one is better and no it didnt go down like they say it did on TV.
Theres a difference in conspiracy and acknowledgedly knowing the plans of these horrific acts that took place and doing nothing about it. I think after 911 happened the Government tried to cover up the fact that they knew it was going to happend and didnt take it seriously. I mean wtf, we trained Saddam in our own military. Our government needs to take some blame