Just a small point. The glass and dust animation shows what appears to be plate glass (it looks like that to me) and the narrator mentions "shards", but I suspect that the glass in WTC 1 and 2 was tempered glass which turns into little cubes (.5cm x .5 cm) when the pane is shattered.
I'm confused, probably since I'm drunk off my ass, but besides that, what's the difference between safety glass and tempered glass? Is safety glass laminated?
I'd love to see this done with an animation of a bunker buster going into an Al Qaeda cave and the resulting carnage. They could even do a filter where you only see their "rags" coming off their heads in super slow mo...ending once and for all the debate whether or not they spin clockwise or counterclockwise!
Have you actually ever seen a building demo job? I have and there are some big differences between them and WTC 9 11! For one, in a demo job, they remove all the glass, due to it's propensity to go "ballistic" in a coarse particulate form. You can clearly see none of that in the 9 11 deal. If charges big enough to do the required beam cutting, were in that building, there would be NO question about it! Glass would have come out of there and be embedded in every surface in a radial pattern and of a particular size and shape. Not the dust fine material they retrieved.
Miter, U.S Senator Karen Johnson would disagree with you "Reputable scientists, engineers, architects and firemen with no political angle dispute the 9/11 Commission report and say that the evidence indicates the Twin Towers and Building 7 came down due to controlled-demolition explosions. Tests corroborate the presence of thermite, an explosive used in building demolitions, at the site of the Twin Towers and Building 7.
Thermite also explains the pools of molten steel in the basement, which no one has been able to otherwise explain and which the National Institute of Standards and Technology simply denies. Why is the government refusing to even consider demolition as a possibility? What are they afraid of? "
Time magazine reported in September 2006 that 36 percent of Americans believe the government was complicit in 9/11. A Zogby poll reported that 51 percent of Americans want Congress to investigate 9/11 further.
When the 9/11 Commission Report was finally released, it was incomplete. It never even addressed the collapse of Building 7, for example. Former FBI Director Louis Freeh has stated that there are inaccuracies in the report and unanswered questions. Even the two chairmen of the 9/11 Commission %u2014 Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton %u2014 have accused the CIA of %u201Cobstructing%u201D the commission, and one commissioner, U.S. Sen. Max Cleland, resigned, stating that the commission was %u201Ccompromised.%u201D The Executive Director for the 9-11 commission is a rabid neocon Philip D. Zelikow who has stated that the war in Iraq was for the benefit of Israel The presidents brother Marvin Bush was a principle in the company providing security and access to the towers until 9-11. At least 5 Israeli nationals were arrested on 9-11 for questioning. They were not questioned but returned to israel where they later admitted they were documenting the event. At least 7 of the FBI named hijackers have been confirmed as still being alive by mainstream news sources.
With all these coincidences and loose ends it makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Every time a major catastrophe hits there are conspiration theories, the larger the event the wilder the theories.
I think there is no dispute that two aircraft did hit the towers. When you look at the construction of the twin towers there is no doubt that a fully fueled wide body aircraft hitting them at anywhere below the very top there will be enough debris to overload the structural strength of the floor, if not immediately then after some time of fuel burning and weakening the structure.
If there was more than extreme incompetence of the US intelligence services in play (they did get warnings about the suicide pilots from at least the German intelligence service and ignored them) it was deliberate ignorance.
Actually bug, the design of the structures (1&2) included a dynamic analysis based on an aircraft colliding with the building at a much higher airspeed (600mph vs 400mph) the mass was apx the same but the kinetic enegy used in the design calcs was much higher (1/2*m*v_squared). There was enough redundancy in the design for the towers to remain standing.
If they had planted explosives, why go to the extra length of hijacking the planes?
It makes no sense, and I am sick of the "structural experts" explaining why the buildings could not collapse due to the impacts. The effect of the fire is usually neglected in their "calculations" since it was not hot enough to melt the steel.
The fact is any usable office building can not have a structure able to withstand the impact of a wide body aircraft plus the resulting fire if it was fully fueled.
Bug I don't know about other country's building codes but in the United States there has never been a structural steel building failure due to fire. Except on 9-11, when there was three.
It was not just fire. How many times did a building stand after being hit by a fully fueled aircraft? Oh, it has never happened before?
And when was the design of theWTC done? In the late 1960s? They sure had a lot of computing power back then, they surely have run the same simulation as you see here in this video.
More liekly they did calculate the result of a homogenuos mass hitting the tower, disregarding harder parts like the turbine shafts which go through the structure like through paper.
perhaps. I am just saying it's worth another look at. This time without interference from the CIA and neocon meddling. By the way building 7 wasn't hit by anything
The structural strength of these buildings was calculated in the late 1960s. How many times did they test what happens if an actual aircraft crashes into the building?
Any calculation is only as good as the data you have for the model. The guys who did this model here did have the "advantage" of having access to actual empirical data. Structural calculations in the 60s and 70s tended to be very optimistic as can be witnessed by many of the then built constructions having problems today.
Building #7 was constructed for how much on the Richter scale? And tested?
I think it somewhat likely that the US government did let the terrorists alone deliberately to get a casus belli, but I also think even they have been shocked by how much damage they managed to inflict.
the arabs did the twin towers. the government knew they were going to do it and did nothing about it, reason being it gave them an excuse to build up the arms industry and get folks together against somebody else. it's nota big conspiracy, just the way the world of power works. my aunt worked in the twin towers and she got blown out of a window. i didn't like her at all but she left me $300 in her will. (i didn't have anything to do with it by the way).
you SEEM TO forgot it was the VP of the USA so his companies can make money from the war it created,
STUPID PEOPLE, WHO PROSPERS FROM THE WAR ? ARABS COUNTRIES BECAUSE THEY CAN CHARGE MORE FOR THE OIL , CORPORATIONS THAT MAKE WEAPONS , TANKS ,PLANES, MINES ,EXPLOSIVES,UNIFORMS,SHOES.CHECK THEM OUT ON THE STOCK MARKET,WITHOUT THIS WAR THERE WOULD BE DEPRESSION AND ALL YOU FUCKING LAME BRAINS THAT DO NOTHINGS ,THAT DON'T HAVE A POT TO PISS IN ,WOULDN'T HAVE PISS IN YOU BECAUSE YOU WOULD ALL BE STARVING. LONGROADTORUN YOU JUST COPYING WHAT THEY WANT IDIOTS LIKE YOU TO READ.
Look AT ALL THE BAD PRESS THE WHITE RODISIANS GOT WHEN THEY DEFENDED THEMSELVES and KILLED THE BLACKS IN THAT COUNTRY. IT WAS THE REVERSE BUT THE NEWS WAS CONTROLLED BY THE UN. NOW LOOK HOW BAD AFRICA IS . SOUTHAFRICA NOW HAS THE HIGHEST PER CAPIDA RAPES , ROBBERS ,AIDS,TB AND SO ON ,THE PEOPLE ARE GOING HUNGREY .Wait watch for more tribal wars,killing inocent other black africans.
Controled? it would take years to plant the c4, months to wire, and all that with no one knowing? And why not do it on a busy day. what about the planes, the so called pilots. it's horse shit, even Miter couldn't pull that off with a 10 million $ budget.
1.)No doubt planes smashed into the buildings. 2.)Security was provided by a company run by Marvin Bush yup GWBushs' bro. Access would not be a problem. Weeks of preparations would be required. It could be done. 3.)I believe arabs hijacked the planes. But I think the U.S. as well as Israel knew it would happen. Those Israeli guys were sent to document it. They admitted it on national (israeli) tv. They knew!!!
Im sure the israelis know everything that is happening with the terrorists, they buy the information or have undercover agents. How do they survive? If they were the USA do you think millions of mexicans would cross their border. BANG !! I don't think so . There would be a lot of blood in the Rio GRANDE.
Not wishing to get into conspiracy theory arguements but a few things intrigue me:
1. The WTC was planned to absorb a hit from either a Boeing 707 or a DC9 (can't remember which) and survive the subsequent fire that would occur. Speeds of jet passenger airliners have not really increased since the inception of these aircraft (the KC-135 is still the basis of the USAF Tanker fleet and is in fact the model from which the 707 was developed) and so the design should have retained integrity. I'd agree that a prolonged fire WOULD have lead to a weakening of structural columns but from an objective standpoint that whole pancaking of 100 floors looked very 'neat' (by which I mean tidy and NOT cool in the US sense of the word)
2. WTC Number 7 collapse still is insufficiently explained.
3. The aircraft that hit the pentagon is not fully explained and non of the cctv footage showing this impact has yet been released other than the carpark barrier footage. My understanding is this is still under federal lock and key and will continue to be so
4. The penn state crash when first shown that day looked nothing like an impact site regards wreckage, scorched area (given that this aircraft too was fully fueled). To be frank this plane MUST have been shot down. I would have made that same call in the same desperate situation. One plane load or an entire building? Who wouldn't?
Finally, with regard to this nicely put together animation, the key word here is ANIMATION. That means a human has programmed something to do what is required visually. Think Disney's Mickey Mouse but with a plane and some buildings, some physics and lots of computer power involved...
To be honest nothing and no one will be able to recreate the horror of what happened on those floors whether the act was conspired or not.
False flags are always an interesting debating point though... historically they appear to work well when engineered and carried through without remorse. Remember a big lie is better than a small one. Can't remember who said that.
Crap, what aboyt eyewitness accounts, it was the plane boss, the plane.
On another note, Abe's wife was in on the hit, she told the actor's guide where they would be sitting. Check it out.
The strangest thing about the wreck of United Flight 93, was the wreckage itself, as in there was none! Compared to other crashes of this type aircraft, the speed and angle, load, fuel etc., there should have been debris everywhere! Instead we are told it was all underground..hmmm...
I did read quite a few accounts on airplace accidents, there is not very much typical unless the circumstances are similar.
I did not read the report on the Penn State crash but if this plane crashed due to a fight in the cockpit it may have rammed almost vertically into the ground under full power. Given a rather soft top soil it can almost completely vanish underground.
Usually crashes happen rather horizontally or into a mountain side. So angle or hard surface provide for a wide debris field. Flight 592 that crashed into the everglades did also come in almost vertically (actually head over at some 110 degrees or so) close to Mach 1, there was very few debris above ground (not above water, above the ground under the water).
See your point but with all due respect Bug a DC9 is a smaller aircraft. 592 also crashed into what was called a deep water swamp with bedrock beneath. Sure the plane disintegrated, yet the NTSB still recovered enough of the wreckage to make a determination of cause.
One normally sees all the wreckage gathered together in a warehouse and rebuilt piece by piece until a jigsaw puzzle has been built up...I still think the Penn state site is puzzling.
With the exception of the cockpit, the Lockerbie 747 left a huge crater and pretty much disintergrated too, yet the amount of wreckage lying around was incredible. Within Lockerbie village itself where the fuselage impacted with enourmous force and speed (factoring in the fuel load and weight of a transatlantic 747 that had just taken off from London), there was still more than enough to build up an accurate picture of what caused the crash
I plain don't believe the 93 wreckage completely buried itself into the ground with a full fuel load that left no scorching on impact. Even if this WERE the case, why is it not recovered and under investigation with the NTSB doing their warehouse thing?
Just tried to read the accident investigation report and got a good idea where the conspiracy theories come from. Following is all you can learn from reading the accident report (usually they are hundereds of pages long):
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows. The Safety Board did not determine the probable cause and does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI.
whenever you have a state that worships money, you will have leaders capable of either perpetrating or allowing the most heinous acts against their people. there is evidence of this from 2000bc onwards. don't be surprised by anything.
Yes, had heard about Liberty and am staggered that more was not done to protect it and the cover up that seemed to follow. Wasn't Gulf of Tonkin subsequently shown to be somewhat skewed from the truth as well; aimed at getting into a war to try and stem the tide of communism?
Pearl Harbour appears to have been known about by both US and other Allied governments prior - giving the excuse needed to galvanize an unwilling majority to get into WW2 against facism. Then there's the Lusitania pre WW1...
Bottom line, and it pains me to admit this as it sounds so cruel, but it appears these may be both necessary and effective when there's a requirement on the part of the powers that be to get nasty blamelessly. They awake the real sleeping giant of ANY country - the general public.
Often times we are too happily ignorant of the world outside, until we see our people hurt or wronged. Politicians have known this from the day the first one of the seedy little fuckers was born. They%u2019ve been using it since then too. It doesn%u2019t take a genius to see the value if you are ruthless and remorseless enough.
Guess it's just tended to be that in the case of the US, its hegemonic powers usually need a pretty big excuse to rally a public who, in general enjoy living in the land of the free and normally don't really want to want to get involved in far away conflicts.
IF the Twin Towers was a false flag to bring the pain to Islam then it worked an absolute treat. The public were up for it against Afghanistan mainly because the Taliban were by far and away the most famously sadistic bunch of Islamic fundamentals on the planet and deserved it! With OBL there too as the 911 orchestrator (whether you think this convenient or not) then it made sense and moderate western public opinion gave it the go.
But then the rationale changed and the lies and illegality surrounding the invasion of Iraq started. These have absolutely humped any credibility the US admin initially possessed posy 911 into the wild blue yonder. It became about dressed up WMD bullshit and a humanitarian mission, but is now mired and has been for some time. Invading armies tend to find this%u2026
My view is that if 911 WAS a false flag then it was purely about oil and the longer term strategic imperative of buffering against expansion into the region by other growing superpowers coupled with a strengthening oil-bearing Russia.
The shit stirring out in the Gulf right now against Iran, plus the movement of a second carrier group into the area only seems aimed at stoking similar as we saw in Tonkin. Would another false flag change minds about Iran? We'll see if history repeats. It could be a step too far for a public who seem increasingly aware of how governments can drag nations down a path they don%u2019t like.
Hindsight%u2019s view is a great thing but Bush and his ignorant little band of brainiacs should have:
1. First and foremost brought the pain to the Saudis and invaded there on the basis of where the 911 hijackers came from. Fuck %u2018em I say %u2013 the House of Saud is full of some highly intelligent businessmen but in the main it%u2019s populated by ignorant degenerate pig fuckers, living under the most revolting version of Islam short of the Taliban. Most of these turds aren%u2019t fit to lick the soles of their women%u2019s feet. Oh and they have a load of oil we need as well. Let%u2019s face it invading that shit hole would be a far easier proposition than invading Iran. The Saudi forces are not exactly battle hardened. Build a huge friggin wall around Mecca and keep the pilgrims happy. Let the rest of the muslim world know they are not safe if they don%u2019t drag their dark aged beliefs into the 21st century (sorry NOT a fan of Islam I%u2019m afraid %u2013 unless the moderates begin to stand up and take the fight internally to the violent fundamentalists within their own religion)
2.Invaded Iraq on the basis that Sadam was a turd who murdered his own people, nothing more, nothing less. Admit too that YES control of oil was also a factor, with a clear and transparent dividing of those war spoils (for that is all they are) among all the OPEC cartel according to their oil income at that time, with sufficient reparations to those who contributed to the war effort on an expense-covering basis, NOT long term exploitation basis. It would have shown OPEC that it%u2019s members can be fucked with if they step out of line and the other members will benefit as a result . Divide and conquer.
Rant over. Normal service resumed
I am reliably informed that Boeing did it.
This explains why the USAF awarded its tanker contract to Airbus.
I dont care what most people believe. I completely believe that our own country was part of the 911 events. It is part of the governments process to enact certain laws to control it's people. Our government has always been involved in things that had nothing to do with us. It seems to always be a financial gain influence. IF the video shown here is even close to being accurate. Then the damage inflicted on the Twin Towers was not enough to have them both collapse from this event. To me it is obvious that the beams were cut before hand of this disaster. PLus how in the heck do buildings that were not even struck or damaged fall to the ground. Let alone have a building such as the towers fall as if they were imploded. Buildings that tall will NOT fall in the fashion they did. Gravity will play a large part in the way it falls. The building was impacted off center, causing the towers to lean towards one way or another. So to me, they would of fallen off kilter and end up toppling over on to other buildings. America needs to wake up and smell the Police State coming upon us!!
Experts have concluded that it did happen this way, see the popular mechanics articles or get the book. The problem with conspiracy theorist such as you is that you really don't have a clue what you are talking about and just mimic what you are told.
Simulations show that the building wwould fall straight down and slightly out as it falls on itself. The building in question, number 7 was struck y this debri as it fell lobbing of part of the building.
Intelligent people look at both sides completely and when in doubt believe experts who are third parties with nothing to gain. I suggest that you spend a bit more time doing some research instead of watching loose change for the 10th time. Everything in that and other conspiracy movies can be explained.
I also suggest you do a little research as the meaing of Occum's Razor.
I hereby Post first!! under article 125 section 4 paragraph 6 ! Any glumerterians failing to claim posting first after doing thereof,so gives up that post or any claim of post thereafter on the thread thus in dispute!!
Comments (74)
To post a comment, you need to login or signup.