End of Moussaoui trial may destroy Bush administration

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Oh noes! They are related!! It's a massive conspiracy! The Illuminati must be configuring all of this!

Please.

withdrawn.. found futher evidence debunking. But please try to explain building 7.

[Darius871]

It hardly seems "preposterous" that even 2% of a building being "scooped out" would put enough stress on the remaining steel skeletion for it to progressively collapse, especially considering the effects of A) 7 hours of raging fire and B) the seismic effect of one million tons of steel and concrete simultaneously smashing into the ground a block away on WTC 7's structural integrity.

I'm not believing this version blindly and admit I can never know the truth, but it makes no less sense than the alternative. A kindergarten-level understanding of gravity makes it seem likely.

[Imran Siddiqui]

[q=Darius871]it makes no less sense than the alternative.[/q]

Which apparently seems to be a massive government conspiracy encompassing FEMA, NIST, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific American.

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by Darius871
It hardly seems "preposterous" that even 2% of a building being "scooped out" would put enough stress on the remaining steel skeletion for it to progressively collapse, especially considering the effects of A) 7 hours of raging fire and B) the seismic effect of one million tons of steel and concrete simultaneously smashing into the ground a block away on WTC 7's structural integrity.

I'm not believing this version blindly and admit I can never know the truth, but it makes no less sense than the alternative.

It is prosterous. A much more likley scenario would be a part of the building, the corner that was afflicted, would slowly collapse, (if at all) and build up a pile of rubble that would sit and support the rest of the building that was stills tanding.

That building went down like it was rigged.

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[q=Darius871]it makes no less sense than the alternative.[/q]

Which apparently seems to be a massive government conspiracy encompassing FEMA, NIST, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific American.

Please respond to the technicality of the collapse of 7... do you actually think 2% of the outer area of the building, one corner, would bring the whole building down in about 10 seconds?

Do you actually believe that?

Do you need to see footage how it went down again?

It went STRAIGHT down

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by NeOmega
Please respond to the technicality of the collapse of 7... do you actually think 2% of the outer area of the building, one corner, would bring the whole building down in about 10 seconds?

Do you actually believe that?

Let's just say I believe Scientific American and Popular Mechanics over some moron on an internet forum. I think 25% of the depth of 1/3rd of the face of the building combined with sciesmic shocks of the two massive towers crumbling, with fire eating away at its insides, is far more likely an explination for the collapse of 7 WTC than it was rigged with bombs in some government conspiracy.

[Darius871]

Perhaps many of the girders and trusses had been progressively tearing apart for hours within the external facade (invisible to us), and then at a certain point the remaining structure couldn't take the stress and collapsed simultaneously.

How can you possibly know otherwise without having been inside the damn thing?

[NeOmega]

Do you need to see footage how it went down again?

It went STRAIGHT down

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Let's just say I believe Scientific American and Popular Mechanics over some moron on an internet forum. I think 25% of the depth of 1/3rd of the face of the building combined with sciesmic shocks of the two massive towers crumbling, with fire eating away at its insides, is far more likely an explination for the collapse of 7 WTC than it was rigged with bombs in some government conspiracy.

and you deny your own eyes. You are the moron.

You believe who you want to believe.

Watch the footage. It is undeniable... watch it and weep.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...secret&pl=true

Just the first fiv eminutes. that is all. Watch it fall from many angles...... straight down, like an ordered demolition not like chaotic damage caused by falling rubble on a corner.

[Darius871]

Undeniable? I've seen the video several times before, and it doesn't change a damn thing. We see an intact facade and then a collapse, which reveals nothing about stresses on the steel skeleton.

You believe what you want to believe.

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by Darius871
Undeniable? I've seen the video several times before, and it doesn't change a damn thing. We see an intact facade and then a collapse, which reveals nothing about stresses on the steel skeleton.

You believe what you want to believe.

1. Facade... not just the facade goes down, the whole thing goes down, and there are many angles to watch it from.

Are you trying to tell me that small damage to 2% of the building, (watch the footage, it shows the damage, it is documented, you can read reports, or look at the pictures and video) on a corner of the building, is going to somehow magically and slowly transfger the stress evenly across the frame of the steel structure so that it magically collapses all at once?

Do you actually believe this? Say it, say you believe it. Say you believe a fractional amount of damage to a large steel-framed building can cause the whole thing to come straight down. Say it was the cause, "unkown phantom stresses by small fires all placed correctly on a steel frame and a sudden catastrophic, (but well ordered) collapse."

Maybe this, a perhaps that, and working hypothesis this. all BS. I have two eyes, and a good sense of physics. That building went down like an ordered demolition.

[Velociryx]

At the risk of being labelled a tin foil hat wearer, it *does* seem rather....odd that a building with a "scooped out" section would fall straight down, rather than "favoring" its damaged side (in the same manner that a tree falls, favoring the cut side).

Not saying there's a conspiracy, just pointing out that if it fell like the official story said it did, then it's gotta be one in several million....gravity and all that jazz. *shrug*

-=Vel=-

[Darius871]

Originally posted by NeOmega
1. Facade... not just the facade goes down, the whole thing goes down, and there are many angles to watch it from.

What I meant was the facade is all we can see from the outside; obviously the whole thing went down.

Originally posted by NeOmega
Do you actually believe this? Say it, say you believe it.

Or else what? Let's make something absolutely clear: I 'believe' nothing. Maybe the 3 factors (not 1) combined to gradually tear apart the steel skeleton over 7 hours until the remaining toothpicks holding it up snapped at the same time, maybe pre-placed explosives were detonated, or maybe Overlord Xenu sent a galactic superwave to shake it to the ground. I wasn't there so I won't know. What I do know is that its falling down instead of sideways 'proves' precisely nothing.

[NeOmega]

We have seen catasrophic damage to large buildings before,

catastrophic as in Alfred P Murrah, as in the embassies in Kenya, as in buildings in Iraq. They had much greater shocks to their foundations, and yet, they still at least partially stood

Yet this steel framed, American engineered skyscraper, built to withstand 100mph winds and earthquakes, gets some rubble at the southwest corner, and a couple of small fires, and in 7 short hours suddenly collpases in on itself?

Unbelievable!

[NeOmega]

Maybe the 3 factors (not 1) combined to gradually tear apart the steel skeleton over 7 hours until the remaining toothpicks holding it up snapped at the same time, maybe pre-placed explosives were detonated, or maybe Overlord Xenu sent a galactic superwave to shake it to the ground. I wasn't there so I won't know. What I do know is that its falling down instead of sideways 'proves' precisely nothing.

I didn's say sideways, but straight down like that is ridiculous. There should have been a gradual collpase from the damaged corner, if anything, not one super demolition freefall in 3 seconds.

[NeOmega]

BTW, I have bought the governemnt story for years, but building 7 has only recenlty really started to nag on what I saw that day.

I still believe planes were flown into 1 and 2 and the pentagon.

But buildign 7 went down very, very unnaturally.

[joncha]

Unbelievable!

[Kuciwalker]

[Darius871]

Another question: if certain parties other than al-Qaeda either carried out the 9/11 attacks or deliberately let them happen (so Bush could get the political capital to go steal Iraqi oil, pour more $ into the arms industry, carry out the PNAC plans for U.S. hegemony, create a NWO global police state, or whatever other ulterior motives teh loons have conjured), what reason would there be to demolish WTC 7 after the Twin Towers had already been destroyed and the Pentagon hit? "They" had already achieved their objective so why bother with that building next door nobody's heard of? And why would they do it 7 hours later, after it had been evacuated?

[Darius871]

Damn, I'm finally off Kuci's sig.

[Kuciwalker]

What? That was your DL?

[Darius871]

Same numbers at the end weren't they?

[Jaguar]

Unbelievable!

[Velociryx]

Another question: if certain parties other than al-Qaeda either carried out the 9/11 attacks or deliberately let them happen (so we could go steal Iraqi oil, pour more $ into the arms industry, carry out the PNAC plans for U.S. hegemony, create a NWO global police state, or whatever other ulterior motives people have in mind), what reason would there be to demolish WTC 7 after the Twin Towers had already been destroyed and the Pentagon hit? "They" had already achieved their objective so why bother with that building next door nobody's heard of? And why would they do it 7 hours later, after it had been evacuated?



I can't speak for what any individual here believes, but IIRC, the popular conspiracy theory for this one is that the building was demolished to better cash in on insurance claims (damaged wouldn't yield as much $ as total demolition). At least, that's the popular buzz.

-=Vel=-

(yay! my interest in various conspiracy theories has actually enabled me to field a question about them!)

[Kuciwalker]

I thought it was an entirely different name...

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by Darius871
Another question: if certain parties other than al-Qaeda either carried out the 9/11 attacks or deliberately let them happen (so Bush could get the political capital to go steal Iraqi oil, pour more $ into the arms industry, carry out the PNAC plans for U.S. hegemony, create a NWO global police state, or whatever other ulterior motives teh loons have conjured), what reason would there be to demolish WTC 7 after the Twin Towers had already been destroyed and the Pentagon hit? "They" had already achieved their objective so why bother with that building next door nobody's heard of? And why would they do it 7 hours later, after it had been evacuated?

It was the building that housed the FBI, the IRS and other governmental agencies.

Also Larry Silverstein benefitted from the insurance, I think, I don't know. I haven't looked into the why much.

What I have looked at is the very unnatural collpase of a building that had very little damage caused to a small corner, and a few small fires.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

YOSSARIAN LIVES!

[Odin]

Originally posted by Velociryx

I can't speak for what any individual here believes, but IIRC, the popular conspiracy theory for this one is that the building was demolished to better cash in on insurance claims (damaged wouldn't yield as much $ as total demolition). At least, that's the popular buzz.

-=Vel=-

(yay! my interest in various conspiracy theories has actually enabled me to field a question about them!)

There's one I haven't heard before. I one I always hear is that it was a neo-con conspiracy for an excuse to start invading countries and crack down on civil liberties...

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by Darius871
Another question: if certain parties other than al-Qaeda either carried out the 9/11 attacks or deliberately let them happen (so Bush could get the political capital to go steal Iraqi oil, pour more $ into the arms industry, carry out the PNAC plans for U.S. hegemony, create a NWO global police state, or whatever other ulterior motives teh loons have conjured), what reason would there be to demolish WTC 7 after the Twin Towers had already been destroyed and the Pentagon hit? "They" had already achieved their objective so why bother with that building next door nobody's heard of? And why would they do it 7 hours later, after it had been evacuated?

GO to this link, look at the map

http://www.wtc7.net/location.html

Don't read any of the conspiracy stuff in there, just look at the map.

Spoiler:

wtc was not in the same complex as the other 6 wtc buildings, which were all total losses. Pulling it made it the final total loss.

Keep in mind, Silverstein is susing to have the twin tower attacks be defined as two separate attacks, so he can get double his money

This map also notes some other things, buildings 5 and 6 absorbed most of the damage.

[joncha]

Spoiler:

Unbelievable!

[Darius871]

nm