"Loose Change" Director Chuckles Over Flight 93

12346»

Comments

  • audome25
    audome25 Posts: 163
    don't gimme no wrote:
    Where have you been? I've heard both engineers and aviation experts claim that this was an inside job.


    great for them, I, being both, have not.
  • spiral out
    spiral out Posts: 1,052
    dangerboy wrote:
    with all the talk about fire and chemicals and such....don't leave out the effect of having the integrity of the steel compromised by the impact of a large jetliner at 400 mph...imho, it's not so hard to believe that the two together could have resulted in the failure of the structure...

    Thats a fine argument but can anybody explain why all the buildings that fell that day looked like controlled demolition, i would have thought that if the towers had collapsed because of the fires burning, steal becoming weak and having a plane stuck in the side of them, that they would have fallen down in a more dangerous way you know maybe falling to the side or something.

    As it was, they fell into a nice pile of rubble in like ten seconds.

    Also what was the reason for the third building to fall?

    That is why i cannot believe the offical line.
    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.

Categories