Again, you're just inventing events here to fit your view. The debris was not destroyed "right away". Much of it sat on the very same spot for months. Eventually, all the WTC steel was sent to a landfill on Staten Island for examination, primarily to find human remains. NIST kept the steel it felt was needed for the investigation. Furthermore, NIST reclaimed some that had been sold when it felt it was necessary.
Did you expect that the investigation was going to inspect all 200,000 tons of steel????
bill manning, editor in chief of fire engineering magazine, has this to say about that:
Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.
i think that metaphor is a bit of a stretch. the steel columns are right at the core of the collapses, not on the periphery. the buildings were designed to withstand multiple jetliner impacts. they failed to do that, so i would think that studying the steel beams would show exactly why and how they failed.
They did study the steel beams, and made determinations based on their studies. You can find the complete list of what they studied somewhere on their website.
i trust nist as much as i trust the warren commission.
Ok, then what the fuck does it matter what they studied? You weren't going to believe them anyway.
how bout a truly independent investigation?
This is a great idea. Go do it.
i disagree that the steel was nothing more than "garbage". the behavoir of the steel is the key element in the buildings' collapses.
Yes it is. That's why they studied key parts of the steel structure.
if they wanted to sell the steel, fine. but whats the rush?
Perhaps no one wanted 200,000 tons of steel just sitting around in their front yard or warehouse. Look, let's say that they had kept that steel until today, and news just broke that they're selling it to China. You'd still be pissed off. You'd demand that someone hold onto that steel until you find the right people to do your "independent investigation".
hang on to it for a month to see if it could be useful in the investigation. they were loading on barges before the smoke cleared.
:rolleyes:
It did sit there "for a month". It sat for a few months, as a matter of fact. The steel was shipped to China, India and elsewhere starting in January, 2002.
It did sit there "for a month". It sat for a few months, as a matter of fact. The steel was shipped to China, India and elsewhere starting in January, 2002.
no, it didn't sit there for a few months. the bill manning piece i referenced above, written in jan. 2002, says, at that point, the steel removal had been going on for three months: "For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China"
you're right. what a nuisance it would be to hang on to evidence that could potentially show how and why 3000 americans died.
Then how come you didn't offer up your garage?
no, it didn't sit there for a few months. the bill manning piece i referenced above, written in jan. 2002, says, at that point, the steel removal had been going on for three months:
"Removal" does not equal "destroy" or "ship to China". The debris from WTC was moved to Staten Island. Shipments overseas to the purchasers began in January 2002. All of this information is out there. I'm not doing research for people on this topic anymore though.
Theres pages among pages about everything you need to know about the TRUTH about the Bush administration. Heres some main points you all need to know (and are in this guys massive video files):
*Bush fraudulently won the 2000 and 2004 elections by linking innocent people's names (mostly african americans, who mostly vote democratic) with people who had commited crimes, thus putting up a "block" on their ability to vote (at least in Florida). Who to thank? Jeb Bush and others.
*Three drills, 2 performed and 1 "canceled", were performed in the pentagon months and years before 9/11 that outlined what to do if someone hijacked a plane and flew it into the Pentagon. Yet Bush and others claim planes crashing into buildings is something they never thought could happen.
*Planes crashing into buildings do not cause buildings (even skyscrapers) to collapse (example: Milan [?] fire). The collapse of the twin towers (and the less talked about but more important world trade center building 7) was caused by controlled demolitions.
*The owner of all of the World Trade center buildings acquired the buildings months before the attacks and put a hefty insurance policy on them. He turned an initial investment of millions of dollars into a 7 billion dollar profit.
*Bush used the 9/11 attacks to raise the military budget and to begin the war on Iraq
*The US air defense did nothing to offset the plane flying for the Pentagon (although a large base is 20 MILES from the Pentagon) and other military planes were either not scrambled or had delayed scrambling to go and stop the hijacked planes
*The NY fire department was close to putting out the flames in both towers when they suddenly heard "popping" sounds (aka detonators like for controlled demolitions) and the buildings started to collapse.
*Bin Laden's family was allowed to be flown out of the United States while the rest of the nation was grounded
Ok, I'm sick of typing, theres SO MUCH MORE, just watch the videos; if you don't already know this stuff, its astounding. And the "best" part is is that it's not just Bush; Johnson/Nixon did the same thing for Vietnam, and Roosevelt/Eisenhower (?) did the same thing for WWII.
Don't be a muppet all your life
A restaurant with a smoking section is like a swimming pool with a pissing section
"Removal" does not equal "destroy" or "ship to China". The debris from WTC was moved to Staten Island. Shipments overseas to the purchasers began in January 2002. All of this information is out there. I'm not doing research for people on this topic anymore though.
manning says that the steel was being cut up and sold for scrap for 3 months, prior to january. "cut up and sold for scrap" = "destroy"
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
there wasn't any room in my garage. but there are plenty of warehouses around that would have done the trick.
How nice of you to offer the services of warehouses you don't own.
manning says that the steel was being cut up and sold for scrap for 3 months, prior to january. "cut up and sold for scrap" = "destroy"
Oh...well then it must be true, despite the fact that NIST had steel and used it as part of its investigation. And it must be true, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of tons of debris sat at ground zero and then Staten Island for months.
Look, by all means question the information you've been given by "official" channels. But don't pretend that the cleanup process following 9/11 somehow proves a conspiracy, or even represents anything nefarious in any way.
Oh...well then it must be true, despite the fact that NIST had steel and used it as part of its investigation. And it must be true, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of tons of debris sat at ground zero and then Staten Island for months.
well just because nist said something, or some government official, or talking head said or wrote something, doesn't mean it's true either. i guess it just depends on who you want to believe. there are all sorts of smart people (scientists, engineers, historians, etc) on all sides of this issue, contradicting each other.
i have reasons to believe that there was some level of government complicity in 911. i think there was motive and opportunity, and i think because of some of the questionable facets in this whole thing, that no one should be presumed innocent or guilty until all avenues are explored.
on the morning of 911, i wasn't thinking conspiracy at all. i bought into the official story initially. i did think a few things were odd however.. like the building 7 collapse, and the fact that any of the buildings collapsed (i think everyone was surprised initally) - but i didn't think too much of it.
then, over the next few weeks and months, i started thinking/reading about some other things that began to seem a little odd to me, for example, how could our military be completely outsmarted by a bunch of cavedwellers? how could the pentagon be hit 90 minutes after the WTC attacks? and what the hell was bush doing sitting in that classroom when a supposedly unknown number of hijacked planes were flying around the country, after two had already hit the WTC? from there, it snowballed.
Look, by all means question the information you've been given by "official" channels. But don't pretend that the cleanup process following 9/11 somehow proves a conspiracy, or even represents anything nefarious in any way.
i think the cleanup process is questionable, but it is low on the totem pole as far as proof of a conspiracy. building 7, flight 93 (which was shot down.. you don't scatter debris over 8 miles by crashing straight into the ground), evidence of possible foreknowledge by the US and others, insider trading, etc, etc.. the official story is nothing but a whitewash to me.
i'm more a fan of popular bands.. like the bee-gees, pearl jam
well just because nist said something, or some government official, or talking head said or wrote something, doesn't mean it's true either. i guess it just depends on who you want to believe. there are all sorts of smart people (scientists, engineers, historians, etc) on all sides of this issue, contradicting each other.
I never said that NIST or any government official should be believed carte blanche. They shouldn't.
i have reasons to believe that there was some level of government complicity in 911. i think there was motive and opportunity, and i think because of some of the questionable facets in this whole thing, that no one should be presumed innocent or guilty until all avenues are explored.
Then by all means explore them.
on the morning of 911, i wasn't thinking conspiracy at all. i bought into the official story initially. i did think a few things were odd however.. like the building 7 collapse, and the fact that any of the buildings collapsed (i think everyone was surprised initally) - but i didn't think too much of it.
Fair enough.
then, over the next few weeks and months, i started thinking/reading about some other things that began to seem a little odd to me, for example, how could our military be completely outsmarted by a bunch of cavedwellers?
How could our military be completely outsmarted by a bunch of conspiracy theorists? If they're that good, wouldn't you think they could stage an event without you being able to figure it out?
how could the pentagon be hit 90 minutes after the WTC attacks? and what the hell was bush doing sitting in that classroom when a supposedly unknown number of hijacked planes were flying around the country, after two had already hit the WTC? from there, it snowballed.
Man, the hindsight machine is really working overtime there in your head.
i think the cleanup process is questionable, but it is low on the totem pole as far as proof of a conspiracy. building 7, flight 93 (which was shot down.. you don't scatter debris over 8 miles by crashing straight into the ground), evidence of possible foreknowledge by the US and others, insider trading, etc, etc..
Sigh.............all of these things are either just made up or misunderstood. But whatever.
the official story is nothing but a whitewash to me.
Obviously. I'll look forward to hearing the results of your "independent" investigation.
There are some legitimate questions that have never been answered...which could easily be answered if someone had the guts to ask. Chief among them, who is the money behind all of the put-options that were placed against the companies most significantly affected by 9/11? Surely the SEC has this information, if not the banks that made the transfers.
Are we to believe that the same terror organization that is only cabaple of IED's/roadside bombs, etc. is capable of pulling off an attack of this magnitude unassisted? There was major assistance. Will we ever know the real players? Nope. But enough of the speculation...lets focus on good old fashioned physical science...the following (less the steel certification disclosure) is 5th grade stuff in most American schools.
The steel used to construct WTC I and II were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard requires samples to be exposed to temperatures around 1000°C (1832°F) for several hours without weakening. The melting point of steel is about 1370°C.
The maximum flame-temperature for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is about 900°C. This is well less than the sustained temperature required to weaken ASTM E119 steel after several hours of exposure, much less melt it.
The NIST report suggests that the steel was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 250°C, which is 1/4th the sustained temperature required to weaken ASTM E119 steel.
There were photos taken of molten pools of steel at the base of both WTC towers even weeks after the attacks. If jet fuel burned that hot, it would melt the engines of jets during the course of routine flights!
I didn't make this shit up. It's science. There's no statistical model that will support the theory of jet fuel weakening or melting steel.
Nice post. I have no such knack for remembering exact facts and have to look things back up constantly....which I hate.
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
i've never seen a scrap of evidence that discounts the official story of 9/11.
have you seen a scrap of evidence that proves the official story of 9/11? even Louis Freeh <Director of FBI, 1993-2001. Former U.S. District Court Judge for Southern District of New York, appointed by President George H.W. Bush. Former Deputy United States Attorney in New York. Former FBI agent. Former officer in United States Army> stated there is no evidence proving bin laden did it...oh, and he also criticizes the commission's official report and credibility
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Nope, you didn't, but someone else did without much thought for the scientific process (i.e. Jenga Theory) and you bought into it . Pictures of molten steel? Was it actually molten steel? The people who actually handled it say it wasn't. Go figure. Was jet fuel the only thing burning that day, or was there millions of sqare feet of office contents burning that day? Hmmm...
Oh come on...Jenga Theory? I am talking about an accellerant, a fuel, and a very poor environment to sustain temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees for the time required to do what the gov't said it did. Nothing in an office building will burn hotter than jet fuel...unless there's something in that office that is not supposed to be there (besides the jet fuel of course).
Believe whatever you need to believe. My education tells me that there's some very big holes in the official explanation. Chemistry and Physics do not support the official story. I'll side with them until the next einstein comes along and turns everything we know on its ear.
Oh come on...Jenga Theory? I am talking about an accellerant, a fuel, and a very poor environment to sustain temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees for the time required to do what the gov't said it did. Nothing in an office building will burn hotter than jet fuel...unless there's something in that office that is not supposed to be there (besides the jet fuel of course).
Believe whatever you need to believe. My education tells me that there's some very big holes in the official explanation. Chemistry and Physics do not support the official story. I'll side with them until the next einstein comes along and turns everything we know on its ear.
doesn't the official nist report claim the fires never got anywhere near as hot enough to weaken the steel?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Indeed it does. They estimate that they got to something like 250-300C. To weaken that grade of steel, you need 1000C for hours.
bah, what does you and yer science know?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
doesn't the official nist report claim the fires never got anywhere near as hot enough to weaken the steel?
hmmmm maybe it was the big ass jets flying into the building at 500mph that weakened the steel. several major columns were damaged on impact causing other columns to take on the additional weight of the one of the heaviest, tallest structures ever built. last I heard, concrete and steel are heavy.
hmmmm maybe it was the big ass jets flying into the building at 500mph that weakened the steel. several major columns were damaged on impact causing other columns to take on the additional weight of the one of the heaviest, tallest structures ever built. last I heard, concrete and steel are heavy.
and it fell so fast, well it was near free fall speed, the....friction melted the steel...? funny, when the jet fuel arguement falls apart you guys go for the next convenient...and what about building 7, it fell because....?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
hmmmm maybe it was the big ass jets flying into the building at 500mph that weakened the steel. several major columns were damaged on impact causing other columns to take on the additional weight of the one of the heaviest, tallest structures ever built. last I heard, concrete and steel are heavy.
it couldnt have been that........
no fucking way.....
Take me piece by piece..... Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
yawn. your arguments toward conspiracies are as boring as they are weak.
and yet you can't seem to stay away....
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
and it fell so fast, well it was near free fall speed, the....friction melted the steel...? funny, when the jet fuel arguement falls apart you guys go for the next convenient...and what about building 7, it fell because....?
im too lazy to read this entire thread.....
im curious....
in your opinion...with the research you have done....
what caused the twin towers to collapse??
Take me piece by piece..... Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
basically, what they want us to believe is some ppl got together in a cave and were able to penetrate our trillion dollar defense network...not only that, but over 90 min after the first plane HIT THE TOWERS a known hijacked plane was able to fly thru DC's no fly zone <Andrew's Air Force Base is only 10 min away from DC>, made a U turn, flew back thru DC's no fly zone and was able to hit the pentagon....over a trillion dollars spent on defense and missile shields and a known hijacked plane was able to penetrate our nation's capital's no fly zone not once, but twice and hit the pentagon????
Just so you know, back in 2001 fighter jets were NOT stationed at Andrew's Air Force base. Back then and today it is mostly used for military transportation.
My brother worked for the Air Force, and now works with the Army Core Of Engineers, and when he was home for Christmas I asked him about fighter jets based at Andrew's.
Take it as you will, but that is what I know to be true.
And on an un-related note he now has Top Secret clearence, and I was jokingly asking him about Roswell and the like and he said 'You're not even asking the right questions'
That right there was kind of scary!!! They be doing stuff that the normal public doesn't even have an idea is going on!
in your opinion...with the research you have done....
what caused the twin towers to collapse??
you need to read the thread to know what you think?
i asked you first; what do you think caused building 7 to collapse?
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Just so you know, back in 2001 fighter jets were NOT stationed at Andrew's Air Force base. Back then and today it is mostly used for military transportation.
My brother worked for the Air Force, and now works with the Army Core Of Engineers, and when he was home for Christmas I asked him about fighter jets based at Andrew's.
Take it as you will, but that is what I know to be true.
And on an un-related note he now has Top Secret clearence, and I was jokingly asking him about Roswell and the like and he said 'You're not even asking the right questions'
That right there was kind of scary!!! They be doing stuff that the normal public doesn't even have an idea is going on!
thanks, i hadn't been around andrew's for years
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Comments
bill manning, editor in chief of fire engineering magazine, has this to say about that:
Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.
read his article "selling out the investigation" here:
http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=OnlineArticles&SubSection=Display&PUBLICATION_ID=25&ARTICLE_ID=131225
he can speak to this stuff much better than i can.
They did study the steel beams, and made determinations based on their studies. You can find the complete list of what they studied somewhere on their website.
Ok, then what the fuck does it matter what they studied? You weren't going to believe them anyway.
This is a great idea. Go do it.
Yes it is. That's why they studied key parts of the steel structure.
Perhaps no one wanted 200,000 tons of steel just sitting around in their front yard or warehouse. Look, let's say that they had kept that steel until today, and news just broke that they're selling it to China. You'd still be pissed off. You'd demand that someone hold onto that steel until you find the right people to do your "independent investigation".
:rolleyes:
It did sit there "for a month". It sat for a few months, as a matter of fact. The steel was shipped to China, India and elsewhere starting in January, 2002.
maybe more stuff on wikipedia
http://groups.msn.com/PearlJamNirvana/messages.msnw
you're right. what a nuisance it would be to hang on to evidence that could potentially show how and why 3000 americans died.
no, it didn't sit there for a few months. the bill manning piece i referenced above, written in jan. 2002, says, at that point, the steel removal had been going on for three months:
"For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China"
this article also mentions that steel started disappearing in september,: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2001%2F09%2F29%2Fwnyc29.xml
Then how come you didn't offer up your garage?
"Removal" does not equal "destroy" or "ship to China". The debris from WTC was moved to Staten Island. Shipments overseas to the purchasers began in January 2002. All of this information is out there. I'm not doing research for people on this topic anymore though.
Don't be a muppet all your life
there wasn't any room in my garage. but there are plenty of warehouses around that would have done the trick.
manning says that the steel was being cut up and sold for scrap for 3 months, prior to january. "cut up and sold for scrap" = "destroy"
You couldn't be anymore paranoid if you mixed weed with acid
How nice of you to offer the services of warehouses you don't own.
Oh...well then it must be true, despite the fact that NIST had steel and used it as part of its investigation. And it must be true, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of tons of debris sat at ground zero and then Staten Island for months.
Look, by all means question the information you've been given by "official" channels. But don't pretend that the cleanup process following 9/11 somehow proves a conspiracy, or even represents anything nefarious in any way.
well just because nist said something, or some government official, or talking head said or wrote something, doesn't mean it's true either. i guess it just depends on who you want to believe. there are all sorts of smart people (scientists, engineers, historians, etc) on all sides of this issue, contradicting each other.
i have reasons to believe that there was some level of government complicity in 911. i think there was motive and opportunity, and i think because of some of the questionable facets in this whole thing, that no one should be presumed innocent or guilty until all avenues are explored.
on the morning of 911, i wasn't thinking conspiracy at all. i bought into the official story initially. i did think a few things were odd however.. like the building 7 collapse, and the fact that any of the buildings collapsed (i think everyone was surprised initally) - but i didn't think too much of it.
then, over the next few weeks and months, i started thinking/reading about some other things that began to seem a little odd to me, for example, how could our military be completely outsmarted by a bunch of cavedwellers? how could the pentagon be hit 90 minutes after the WTC attacks? and what the hell was bush doing sitting in that classroom when a supposedly unknown number of hijacked planes were flying around the country, after two had already hit the WTC? from there, it snowballed.
i think the cleanup process is questionable, but it is low on the totem pole as far as proof of a conspiracy. building 7, flight 93 (which was shot down.. you don't scatter debris over 8 miles by crashing straight into the ground), evidence of possible foreknowledge by the US and others, insider trading, etc, etc.. the official story is nothing but a whitewash to me.
~Ron Burgundy
I never said that NIST or any government official should be believed carte blanche. They shouldn't.
Then by all means explore them.
Fair enough.
How could our military be completely outsmarted by a bunch of conspiracy theorists? If they're that good, wouldn't you think they could stage an event without you being able to figure it out?
Man, the hindsight machine is really working overtime there in your head.
Sigh.............all of these things are either just made up or misunderstood. But whatever.
Obviously. I'll look forward to hearing the results of your "independent" investigation.
Nice post. I have no such knack for remembering exact facts and have to look things back up constantly....which I hate.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
have you seen a scrap of evidence that proves the official story of 9/11? even Louis Freeh <Director of FBI, 1993-2001. Former U.S. District Court Judge for Southern District of New York, appointed by President George H.W. Bush. Former Deputy United States Attorney in New York. Former FBI agent. Former officer in United States Army> stated there is no evidence proving bin laden did it...oh, and he also criticizes the commission's official report and credibility
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Oh come on...Jenga Theory? I am talking about an accellerant, a fuel, and a very poor environment to sustain temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees for the time required to do what the gov't said it did. Nothing in an office building will burn hotter than jet fuel...unless there's something in that office that is not supposed to be there (besides the jet fuel of course).
Believe whatever you need to believe. My education tells me that there's some very big holes in the official explanation. Chemistry and Physics do not support the official story. I'll side with them until the next einstein comes along and turns everything we know on its ear.
old music: http://www.myspace.com/slowloader
doesn't the official nist report claim the fires never got anywhere near as hot enough to weaken the steel?
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Indeed it does. They estimate that they got to something like 250-300C. To weaken that grade of steel, you need 1000C for hours.
old music: http://www.myspace.com/slowloader
bah, what does you and yer science know?
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
hmmmm maybe it was the big ass jets flying into the building at 500mph that weakened the steel. several major columns were damaged on impact causing other columns to take on the additional weight of the one of the heaviest, tallest structures ever built. last I heard, concrete and steel are heavy.
what do you think brought those towers down???
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
irrelevant.
and it fell so fast, well it was near free fall speed, the....friction melted the steel...? funny, when the jet fuel arguement falls apart you guys go for the next convenient...and what about building 7, it fell because....?
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
no fucking way.....
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
and building 7?
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
www.myspace.com/jensvad
and yet you can't seem to stay away....
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
im curious....
in your opinion...with the research you have done....
what caused the twin towers to collapse??
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
Just so you know, back in 2001 fighter jets were NOT stationed at Andrew's Air Force base. Back then and today it is mostly used for military transportation.
My brother worked for the Air Force, and now works with the Army Core Of Engineers, and when he was home for Christmas I asked him about fighter jets based at Andrew's.
Take it as you will, but that is what I know to be true.
And on an un-related note he now has Top Secret clearence, and I was jokingly asking him about Roswell and the like and he said 'You're not even asking the right questions'
That right there was kind of scary!!! They be doing stuff that the normal public doesn't even have an idea is going on!
you need to read the thread to know what you think?
i asked you first; what do you think caused building 7 to collapse?
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
thanks, i hadn't been around andrew's for years
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way