I do not believe bombs were planted in the building.
I do not believe the government knew of these exact attacks.
I do believe the planes hitting the tower caused the collapse
ha,ha,ha funny shit.you poor uninformed soul.
"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot". Mark Twain
"I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
Emiliano Zapata
It appears likely that the impact of the plane crash destroyed a significant number of perimeter columns on several floors of the building, severely weakening the entire system. Initially this was not enough to cause collapse.
However, as fire raged in the upper floors, the heat would have been gradually affecting the behaviour of the remaining material. As the planes had only recently taken off, the fire would have been initially fuelled by large volumes of jet fuel, which then ignited any combustible material in the building.
While the fire would not have been hot enough to melt any of the steel, the strength of the steel drops markedly with prolonged exposure to fire. Once one storey collapsed all floors above would have begun to fall. The huge mass of falling structure would gain momentum, crushing the structurally intact floors below, resulting in catastrophic failure of the entire structure. While the columns at say level 50 were designed to carry the static load of 50 floors above, once one floor collapsed and the floors above started to fall, the dynamic load of 50 storeys above is very much greater, and the columns were almost instantly destroyed as each floor progressively "pancaked" to the ground.
1. Motive = complicity (the government caused 9/11)
2. Available information = foreknowledge (the government knew 9/11 was going to happen)
3. Jenga = WTC (the world trade center would have fallen to it's side)
4. Supporting eyewitness = truth, contradictory eyewitness = irrelevancy
5. Questioning the official version = quest for truth, questioning the alternative versions = brainwashed
Each of these fallacies is based on the application of assumption as fact. Furthermore, each creates a contradiction.
1. A powerful group of people does not equal the US government but could include some members of it. So there goes the 'govt is too dumb' argument because nobody is saying that.
2. That can only be an assumption.
3. The pancake theory doesn't provide for the time it takes each floor to give way to the next and doesn't explain explosions heard at the base.
4. Eyewitnesses don't prove or disprove any of the theories.
5. I only have a problem when people refuse to actually discuss their reasoning. Why bother even believing anything if you don't know why you do or don't believe it?
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
feel free to add to the discussion. good luck to you
Farfromglorified put it well.
But I have doubts, moot at this point but still. Either the Hawks simply used 9/11 as an excuse to fulfill their wildest plans, including the invasion of Iraq, or they had a hand in the attacks themselves, knowing full well the power they would be given after such an event.
PNAC, this rightwing think tank that pretty much rules the world, put out a repor a year before 9/11. They made some claims about wanting a hand in the middle east oil, and that nothing short of a pearl harbor like attack on American soil would motivate the public enough to invade and so on. It just so happened that a year later 9/11 occured-with plenty of sketchy details surrounding the actual collapse of the buildings, specifically WT7, also about materials coming in the and out of the building just prior to the event, and suddenly they have all the power they ever wanted.
But I have doubts, moot at this point but still. Either the Hawks simply used 9/11 as an excuse to fulfill their wildest plans, including the invasion of Iraq, or they had a hand in the attacks themselves, knowing full well the power they would be given after such an event.
PNAC, this rightwing think tank that pretty much rules the world, put out a repor a year before 9/11. They made some claims about wanting a hand in the middle east oil, and that nothing short of a pearl harbor like attack on American soil would motivate the public enough to invade and so on. It just so happened that a year later 9/11 occured-with plenty of sketchy details surrounding the actual collapse of the buildings, specifically WT7, also about materials coming in the and out of the building just prior to the event, and suddenly they have all the power they ever wanted.
so basically you have zero proof of anything. you just think that some "right wingers" who wanted their hand in oil, sat in a room, or over a cup of coffee at starbucks, and came up with a plan to attack america.
so basically you have zero proof of anything. you just think that some "right wingers" who wanted their hand in oil, sat in a room, or over a cup of coffee at starbucks, and came up with a plan to attack america.
sorry, I disagree. thanks for sharing
he has as much proof as you do.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
so basically you have zero proof of anything. you just think that some "right wingers" who wanted their hand in oil, sat in a room, or over a cup of coffee at starbucks, and came up with a plan to attack america.
Top Pentagon officials were warned and cancelled flights on September 10th
NEWSWEEK has learned that the state of alert had been high during the past two weeks, and a particularly urgent warning may have been received the night before the attacks, causing some top Pentagon brass to cancel a trip.
Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building:
NSA Intercepts On Eve of 9/11 Sent a Warning:
US Heard 'Tomorrow Is Zero Hour' on Eve of Attacks:
Condoleezza Rice Warned Sept. 6 About Imminent Terror Attack:
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT - U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE - 7TH SEPTEMBER (SAYING BIN LADEN WAS ABOUT TO ATTACK): "We are also concerned about information we received in May 2001 that American citizens may be the target of a terrorist threat from extremist groups with links to Usama Bin Ladin's Al-Qaida organization."
German police confirm Iranian deportee phoned warnings:
FBI 'ignored leads':
Some Got Warning: Don't Go Downtown on Sept. 11:
Prior Knowledge of Sept. 11 Not Just Urban Legend: "Do you see those two buildings?" he asked while pointing toward the World Trade Center. "They won't be standing there next week." It was noon, Sept. 6, 2001.
Police: Student spoke of attacks before Sept. 11:
EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER 01-261 (Jeb Bush declares martial law 4 days before September 11th):
1. A powerful group of people does not equal the US government but could include some members of it. So there goes the 'govt is too dumb' argument because nobody is saying that.
Ok. But that doesn't address the point. "A powerful group of people" can be anyone from the US Govt, Al Qaeda or the Shriners. Power does not equal guilt. Furthermore, motive does not equal guilt, as was my point.
2. That can only be an assumption.
Correct, and a bad one at that. Much of the information highlighted in the "foreknowledge" arguments is information you and I had access to. Perhaps we "let it happen" as well, right?
3. The pancake theory doesn't provide for the time it takes each floor to give way to the next and doesn't explain explosions heard at the base.
Tell me, what is the minumum descent time available for the pancake theory?
4. Eyewitnesses don't prove or disprove any of the theories.
No, but it provides support. Particularly when some of those eyewitnesses are cameras. Furthermore, an argument cannot have it both ways. You cannot rejects 100 eyewitnesses and then accept the 1 that agrees with your version of events without creating a contradiction.
5. I only have a problem when people refuse to actually discuss their reasoning. Why bother even believing anything if you don't know why you do or don't believe it?
While the fire would not have been hot enough to melt any of the steel, the strength of the steel drops markedly with prolonged exposure to fire.
there have been many instances, before and after 911, where steel framed office buildings burned for much, much longer than the WTC towers - to the point where the buildings were completely gutted, yet they never collapsed.
look at the pictures on this site: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html
now show me a picture of the wtc buildings burning like that. we see a lot of smoke, but no raging infernos. the WTC buildings burned for about an hour each before collapsing. firefighters inside said the fires were almost out.
Once one storey collapsed all floors above would have begun to fall. The huge mass of falling structure would gain momentum, crushing the structurally intact floors below, resulting in catastrophic failure of the entire structure. While the columns at say level 50 were designed to carry the static load of 50 floors above, once one floor collapsed and the floors above started to fall, the dynamic load of 50 storeys above is very much greater, and the columns were almost instantly destroyed as each floor progressively "pancaked" to the ground.
all this would happen in 10 seconds? 110 floors of steel and concrete turned into dust in 10 seconds. 10 floors a second.. into dust.
what are all of the squibs shooting out of the building well below the collapse zone? look at them here: http://www.yourdailymedia.com/media/1152446814/911_WTC_Squibs
watch closely.. there are a lot of them. then go watch a controlled demo.. you'll see the same thing.
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
there have been many instances, before and after 911, where steel framed office buildings burned for much, much longer than the WTC towers - to the point where the buildings were completely gutted, yet they never collapsed.
look at the pictures on this site: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html
Were the office buildings of which you speak hit by a Boeing 757 with enough fuel for a cross country flight?
Were the office buildings of which you speak hit by a Boeing 757 with enough fuel for a cross country flight?
no they weren't, but the explanation of the WTC collapses is that fire weakened the steel to the point were the buildings fell. the buildings survived the impacts, as they were designed to do.
a majority of the jet fuel, particularly in the south tower crash, was burned up in the fireball outside of the building. the fires were at their hottest immediately following the crashes, gradually losing heat as time went by. firefighters in the south tower said the fires were almost out when they got up there.
the fires had died down. the buildings were standing with no one expecting a collapse. then all of a sudden.. down they went. (and also, building 7 was not hit by a plane, nor was it engulfed in flames)
i'm so tired of all of you just quoting some loony toon websites.
whatreallyhappened.com......guess what....i made a site too...its called nothingbutthetruth.com....do u believe everything on there? its the truth i promise.
just tell me exactly what you believe to be true. its simple. dont tell me you dont know, dont tell me you dont believe the offical story. tell me exactly how you feel. what really happened on September 11th, 2001. grab your sack off the floor and just say it.
I'll tell youy something that was supposed to have happened that day that did'nt. There was to be another plane, a plane to fly into WTC 7. This was flight 93, or possibly the supposed plane that flew into the Pentagon. I don't believe it was a plane that struck the pentagon, and I don't believe that is the wreckage of flight 93 in that field. One of these 2 planes was shot down with a fighter jet. One of these or a drone driven plane was supposed to have flown into WTC 7. They (whoever "they" may be) accomplished some of their goals but had to go to Plan B on a WTC 7. It's not that complicated to the trained eye. Just look for the clues. This whole propaganda war is aimed at the aging electorate. They buy into this administrations fearmongering christian nationalistic oblivious sanctimonius bullshit!! I can't wait for the youth of America to take control of this countries poitics.
i'm so tired of all of you just quoting some loony toon websites.
whatreallyhappened.com......guess what....i made a site too...its called nothingbutthetruth.com....do u believe everything on there? its the truth i promise.
why don't you actually tell me what you think about what the firefighter's said, instead of attacking the name of the website? what the hell does that have to do with anything??
just tell me exactly what you believe to be true. its simple. dont tell me you dont know, dont tell me you dont believe the offical story. tell me exactly how you feel. what really happened on September 11th, 2001. grab your sack off the floor and just say it.
i don't know what exactly happened. however, it is my belief that the official story is horseshit, and that the official investigation was a complete whitewash. there should be a new investigation that doesn't ignore building 7; that offers an explanation for pools of molten steel in the WTC basements that smoldered for weeks; that explains how, in the case of flight 93, debris was found miles away from the supposed crash site; that explains where our air defenses were that day; that explains how hani hanjour made a near impossible manuever with a 757 when he wasn't capable of flying a small single engine plane; that actually holds someone accountable for what happened; etc., etc, etc.
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
how many times did it take to pass your GED? please stop wasting my time
gee...Delusions of Grandeur or Pseudointellectual?quite obviously naive and no grasp of history (true history).waste your time?sorry to intrude upon your denial/stupidity with the truth,you go ahead back to sleep.don't worry,some day you too could aspire to get your own GED
"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot". Mark Twain
"I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
Emiliano Zapata
gee...Delusions of Grandeur or Pseudointellectual?quite obviously naive and no grasp of history (true history).waste your time?sorry to intrude upon your denial/stupidity with the truth,you go ahead back to sleep.don't worry,some day you too could aspire to get your own GED
you add nothing to the discussion. now please let the adults talk
you add nothing to the discussion. now please let the adults talk
Please lighten up. Your very reply here disproves your contention. If someone is saying things you don't feel contribute to the discussion, act accordingly and move on.
i don't know what exactly happened. however, it is my belief that the official story is horseshit, and that the official investigation was a complete whitewash. there should be a new investigation that doesn't ignore building 7; that offers an explanation for pools of molten steel in the WTC basements that smoldered for weeks; that explains how, in the case of flight 93, debris was found miles away from the supposed crash site; that explains where our air defenses were that day; that explains how hani hanjour made a near impossible manuever with a 757 when he wasn't capable of flying a small single engine plane; that actually holds someone accountable for what happened; etc., etc, etc.
cop out. so you dont believe the offical story. I got it. what do you believe from those almighty websites you constantly quote? did rumsfield or people at the highest levels of government know that planes would fly into the wtc that day? did they pick the targets? did a missile hit the pentegon? where bombs placed throughout the WTC days prior? and then set off by someone in a precise and timely manner during the choas 90 minutes after the planes hit?
i'm so tired of all of you just quoting some loony toon websites.
whatreallyhappened.com......guess what....i made a site too...its called nothingbutthetruth.com....do u believe everything on there? its the truth i promise.
just tell me exactly what you believe to be true. its simple. dont tell me you dont know, dont tell me you dont believe the offical story. tell me exactly how you feel. what really happened on September 11th, 2001. grab your sack off the floor and just say it.
ah yes, the main card in your deck, instead of debating any kind of information you attack the website...again
Please lighten up. Your very reply here disproves your contention. If someone is saying things you don't feel contribute to the discussion, act accordingly and move on.
ah yes, the main card in your deck, instead of debating any kind of information you attack the website...again
I presented what I believe to be true. I was asking him and others like you a direct question. feel free to answer, but I'm sure I'll just get i dont know, the govermenet lied.
I presented what I believe to be true. I was asking him and others like you a direct question. feel free to answer, but I'm sure I'll just get i dont know, the govermenet lied.
Please repost your question, and I will try to give you an honest answer as to why I believe what I do.
As far as what a reliable sources, on the previous page there were a ton of them posted.
You say the buildings collapsed because of a fire weakening steel by burning at 800c.
Now if this is the case and the fire was this hot how comes there were fire fighters on the 77th-78th floor?
transcript of the tape
Battalion Seven Chief: "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."
Ladder 15: "Chief, what stair you in?"
Battalion Seven Chief: "South stairway Adam, South Tower."
Ladder 15: "Floor 78?"
Battalion Seven Chief: "Ten-four, numerous civilians, we gonna need two engines up here."
Battalion Seven Chief: "Tower one. Battalion Seven to Ladder 15.
Fifteen."
Battalion Seven Chief: "I'm going to need two of your firefighters Adam stairway to knock down two fires. We have a house line stretched we could use some water on it, knock it down, kay."
Ladder 15: "Alright ten-four, we're coming up the stairs. We're on 77 now in the B stair, I'll be right to you."
Battalion Seven Operations Tower One: "Battalion Seven Operations Tower One to Battalion Nine, need you on floor above 79. We have access stairs going up to 79, kay."
Battalion Nine: "Alright, I'm on my way up Orio."
Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
Please repost your question, and I will try to give you an honest answer as to why I believe what I do.
As far as what a reliable sources, on the previous page there were a ton of them posted.
just tell me exactly what you believe to be true. its simple. dont tell me you dont know, dont tell me you dont believe the offical story. tell me exactly how you feel. what really happened on September 11th, 2001. grab your sack off the floor and just say it
That's like asking how it's possible to stand next to a campfire without being burned.
Just because fires can reach upwards 1000 degrees, it doesn't mean the the whole floor or the whole building experienced those temperatures.
Ok what about the bit where the firefighter says "we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."
Is that a raging 800c fire?
Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
Comments
ha,ha,ha funny shit.you poor uninformed soul.
"I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
Emiliano Zapata
It appears likely that the impact of the plane crash destroyed a significant number of perimeter columns on several floors of the building, severely weakening the entire system. Initially this was not enough to cause collapse.
However, as fire raged in the upper floors, the heat would have been gradually affecting the behaviour of the remaining material. As the planes had only recently taken off, the fire would have been initially fuelled by large volumes of jet fuel, which then ignited any combustible material in the building.
While the fire would not have been hot enough to melt any of the steel, the strength of the steel drops markedly with prolonged exposure to fire. Once one storey collapsed all floors above would have begun to fall. The huge mass of falling structure would gain momentum, crushing the structurally intact floors below, resulting in catastrophic failure of the entire structure. While the columns at say level 50 were designed to carry the static load of 50 floors above, once one floor collapsed and the floors above started to fall, the dynamic load of 50 storeys above is very much greater, and the columns were almost instantly destroyed as each floor progressively "pancaked" to the ground.
how many times did it take to pass your GED? please top wasting my time
1. A powerful group of people does not equal the US government but could include some members of it. So there goes the 'govt is too dumb' argument because nobody is saying that.
2. That can only be an assumption.
3. The pancake theory doesn't provide for the time it takes each floor to give way to the next and doesn't explain explosions heard at the base.
4. Eyewitnesses don't prove or disprove any of the theories.
5. I only have a problem when people refuse to actually discuss their reasoning. Why bother even believing anything if you don't know why you do or don't believe it?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Farfromglorified put it well.
But I have doubts, moot at this point but still. Either the Hawks simply used 9/11 as an excuse to fulfill their wildest plans, including the invasion of Iraq, or they had a hand in the attacks themselves, knowing full well the power they would be given after such an event.
PNAC, this rightwing think tank that pretty much rules the world, put out a repor a year before 9/11. They made some claims about wanting a hand in the middle east oil, and that nothing short of a pearl harbor like attack on American soil would motivate the public enough to invade and so on. It just so happened that a year later 9/11 occured-with plenty of sketchy details surrounding the actual collapse of the buildings, specifically WT7, also about materials coming in the and out of the building just prior to the event, and suddenly they have all the power they ever wanted.
so basically you have zero proof of anything. you just think that some "right wingers" who wanted their hand in oil, sat in a room, or over a cup of coffee at starbucks, and came up with a plan to attack america.
sorry, I disagree. thanks for sharing
he has as much proof as you do.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
make up your own mind...
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hoax.html
plans of attack before the event?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/preplanned.html
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/archiveprior_knowledge.html
Top Pentagon officials were warned and cancelled flights on September 10th
NEWSWEEK has learned that the state of alert had been high during the past two weeks, and a particularly urgent warning may have been received the night before the attacks, causing some top Pentagon brass to cancel a trip.
Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building:
NSA Intercepts On Eve of 9/11 Sent a Warning:
US Heard 'Tomorrow Is Zero Hour' on Eve of Attacks:
NSA didn't share key pre-Sept. 11 information, sources say:
Condoleezza Rice Warned Sept. 6 About Imminent Terror Attack:
PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT - U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE - 7TH SEPTEMBER (SAYING BIN LADEN WAS ABOUT TO ATTACK): "We are also concerned about information we received in May 2001 that American citizens may be the target of a terrorist threat from extremist groups with links to Usama Bin Ladin's Al-Qaida organization."
German police confirm Iranian deportee phoned warnings:
FBI 'ignored leads':
Some Got Warning: Don't Go Downtown on Sept. 11:
Prior Knowledge of Sept. 11 Not Just Urban Legend: "Do you see those two buildings?" he asked while pointing toward the World Trade Center. "They won't be standing there next week." It was noon, Sept. 6, 2001.
Police: Student spoke of attacks before Sept. 11:
EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER 01-261 (Jeb Bush declares martial law 4 days before September 11th):
http://www.prisonplanet.com/911.html
Ok. But that doesn't address the point. "A powerful group of people" can be anyone from the US Govt, Al Qaeda or the Shriners. Power does not equal guilt. Furthermore, motive does not equal guilt, as was my point.
Correct, and a bad one at that. Much of the information highlighted in the "foreknowledge" arguments is information you and I had access to. Perhaps we "let it happen" as well, right?
Tell me, what is the minumum descent time available for the pancake theory?
No, but it provides support. Particularly when some of those eyewitnesses are cameras. Furthermore, an argument cannot have it both ways. You cannot rejects 100 eyewitnesses and then accept the 1 that agrees with your version of events without creating a contradiction.
That's an excellent question.
there have been many instances, before and after 911, where steel framed office buildings burned for much, much longer than the WTC towers - to the point where the buildings were completely gutted, yet they never collapsed.
look at the pictures on this site:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html
now show me a picture of the wtc buildings burning like that. we see a lot of smoke, but no raging infernos. the WTC buildings burned for about an hour each before collapsing. firefighters inside said the fires were almost out.
all this would happen in 10 seconds? 110 floors of steel and concrete turned into dust in 10 seconds. 10 floors a second.. into dust.
what are all of the squibs shooting out of the building well below the collapse zone? look at them here:
http://www.yourdailymedia.com/media/1152446814/911_WTC_Squibs
watch closely.. there are a lot of them. then go watch a controlled demo.. you'll see the same thing.
no they weren't, but the explanation of the WTC collapses is that fire weakened the steel to the point were the buildings fell. the buildings survived the impacts, as they were designed to do.
a majority of the jet fuel, particularly in the south tower crash, was burned up in the fireball outside of the building. the fires were at their hottest immediately following the crashes, gradually losing heat as time went by. firefighters in the south tower said the fires were almost out when they got up there.
the fires had died down. the buildings were standing with no one expecting a collapse. then all of a sudden.. down they went. (and also, building 7 was not hit by a plane, nor was it engulfed in flames)
read here to see what some of the firefighters who were there had to say:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_firefighters.html
smoke is seen rising from the base of the towers well before the collapses. where was it coming from?
whatreallyhappened.com......guess what....i made a site too...its called nothingbutthetruth.com....do u believe everything on there? its the truth i promise.
just tell me exactly what you believe to be true. its simple. dont tell me you dont know, dont tell me you dont believe the offical story. tell me exactly how you feel. what really happened on September 11th, 2001. grab your sack off the floor and just say it.
why don't you actually tell me what you think about what the firefighter's said, instead of attacking the name of the website? what the hell does that have to do with anything??
i don't know what exactly happened. however, it is my belief that the official story is horseshit, and that the official investigation was a complete whitewash. there should be a new investigation that doesn't ignore building 7; that offers an explanation for pools of molten steel in the WTC basements that smoldered for weeks; that explains how, in the case of flight 93, debris was found miles away from the supposed crash site; that explains where our air defenses were that day; that explains how hani hanjour made a near impossible manuever with a 757 when he wasn't capable of flying a small single engine plane; that actually holds someone accountable for what happened; etc., etc, etc.
gee...Delusions of Grandeur or Pseudointellectual?quite obviously naive and no grasp of history (true history).waste your time?sorry to intrude upon your denial/stupidity with the truth,you go ahead back to sleep.don't worry,some day you too could aspire to get your own GED
"I would rather die on my feet than to live on my knees."
Emiliano Zapata
this is part of what i call "the message pit trifecta of death"
1. What kind of wine/cigarettes does "eddie".......?
2. Where can i find /have you heard "i'm still here?
3. Loose Change.....blah blah
any of those three state "lonely n00b" to the highest order
out
you add nothing to the discussion. now please let the adults talk
I'm going to guess either of these two:
A) Smoke From Hell
Please lighten up. Your very reply here disproves your contention. If someone is saying things you don't feel contribute to the discussion, act accordingly and move on.
cop out. so you dont believe the offical story. I got it. what do you believe from those almighty websites you constantly quote? did rumsfield or people at the highest levels of government know that planes would fly into the wtc that day? did they pick the targets? did a missile hit the pentegon? where bombs placed throughout the WTC days prior? and then set off by someone in a precise and timely manner during the choas 90 minutes after the planes hit?
ah yes, the main card in your deck, instead of debating any kind of information you attack the website...again
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
i know. your right. i'm trying.
I presented what I believe to be true. I was asking him and others like you a direct question. feel free to answer, but I'm sure I'll just get i dont know, the govermenet lied.
Please repost your question, and I will try to give you an honest answer as to why I believe what I do.
As far as what a reliable sources, on the previous page there were a ton of them posted.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
You say the buildings collapsed because of a fire weakening steel by burning at 800c.
Now if this is the case and the fire was this hot how comes there were fire fighters on the 77th-78th floor?
transcript of the tape
Battalion Seven Chief: "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."
Ladder 15: "Chief, what stair you in?"
Battalion Seven Chief: "South stairway Adam, South Tower."
Ladder 15: "Floor 78?"
Battalion Seven Chief: "Ten-four, numerous civilians, we gonna need two engines up here."
Battalion Seven Chief: "Tower one. Battalion Seven to Ladder 15.
Fifteen."
Battalion Seven Chief: "I'm going to need two of your firefighters Adam stairway to knock down two fires. We have a house line stretched we could use some water on it, knock it down, kay."
Ladder 15: "Alright ten-four, we're coming up the stairs. We're on 77 now in the B stair, I'll be right to you."
Battalion Seven Operations Tower One: "Battalion Seven Operations Tower One to Battalion Nine, need you on floor above 79. We have access stairs going up to 79, kay."
Battalion Nine: "Alright, I'm on my way up Orio."
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
just tell me exactly what you believe to be true. its simple. dont tell me you dont know, dont tell me you dont believe the offical story. tell me exactly how you feel. what really happened on September 11th, 2001. grab your sack off the floor and just say it
That's like asking how it's possible to stand next to a campfire without being burned.
Just because fires can reach upwards 1000 degrees, it doesn't mean the the whole floor or the whole building experienced those temperatures.
Ok what about the bit where the firefighter says "we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."
Is that a raging 800c fire?
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.